(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FvVHJA1o.png&hash=bed439a4755cc0009d19602d49c44fc87aba1ef1)
RRWnewlogoOVERVIEW
The RealRailway (abbreviated RRW) is the NAM component that involves all current rail modding done by the NAM team. It changes the look of the default heavy rail network and adds functionality. It is a successor to the Railway Addon Mod (RAM) (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=5975.0), which it supersedes. The major difference between these mods is that where the RAM started from the Maxis look of the network and added elements to that, the RRW is a redesign, with its basic premise being a slight yet important rescaling of the rail width. Any content that has been added by the RAM has been included by the RRW, and expansion of rail options will remain the RRW's main goal.
The RealRailway's name is an analogy to the popular RealHighway (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=990.0) mod, whose increased realism compared to earlier content has revealed issues of scale and balance across the other networks. This has been the primary impetus behind the RRW's creation. Technically, however, the two are not any more related than other NAM components are. The RRW will most likely not become as large as the RHW due to the different nature of real life rail networks. The emphasis of the mod will lie first on increasing the network's fluidity and only second on width, capacity and interchangeability with itself or other networks.
>>> NAM DOWNLOAD LINK (http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=851) <<<
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
- I installed RRW; my rails don't change. I keep seeing Maxis textures. Why are some textures darker than others?
If you want to convert your existing rails to RRW, you need to re-draw (i.e. click on) any draggable rail that exists in your cities (thus excluding puzzle pieces). This is because the RRW converts the default rail network from being texture-based to being model-based, as a method to counter differences in shading and coloring across the network. - I'm still seeing Maxis textures!
If you've redrawn your railroads and still see Maxis textures, that means that you've drawn a specific configuration that is not (currently) supported by the RRW. Some setups are unrealistic or unnecessary yet remain available under RRW with Maxis textures for ease of construction. See the manual for further information. - I can't click on my network or drag over it. It gives an error/red footprint.
The code for the rail tool has been altered. Several previously available setups are no longer supported, as outlined in this post (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15931.msg470374#msg470374). Red footprints may be encountered in the vicinity of curves. In this case, bulldoze the curve and rebuild it. This only has to be done once after RRW has been installed. - Why do the textures look like this? My local railroad looks different. Will there be textures that look like x or y?
The basic appearance of the textures has been developed over a six month period with public and private evaluations from many people. This particular look has been chosen as a relatively universal impression of what rails look like. The developers recognize that there are probably more variations of rails than of road asphalt, and the latter has already spawned several dozen texture mods. As a logical result, the developers encourage the creation of regional or technical variations by third-party creators, but there will be no official NAM Team support for any of these for the time being. - Will you include any texture variations as additional overrides (i.e. a SAM-like approach?)
No. The rail network is far more extensive than streets, and counts many hundreds of textures. The only overrides for this network will be functional variants. - Why is the railhead dark and not shiny?
You don't actually see the railhead, you see the side of the rail, which is always rusty. Viewed from the SC4 angle, the railhead would constitute less than half a pixel on a 128px texture. Inclusion has been attempted several times and severely distorts the balance of scale. (Also see this topic (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15223.20).) - Is this a rural railway?
No, it's a real railway ;D It's designed to represent both urban and rural lines. - Why are the textures not HD?
The gains of having a HD transit texture versus the increased download size and game loading times is minimal, if there's any at all. - Is the RRW compatible with the RAM? Will I need to bulldoze RAM content?
The RRW is backwards compatible with the RAM, meaning all existing content has been converted to the new specs. You don't need to bulldoze existing puzzle pieces. The only thing you need to do is redraw (i.e. click on) your existing dragged stretches of rail to convert them to RRW. - Will the RAM continue to be supported? Will there be new content with the old textures?
The RAM has been effectively put on hold by the NAM team, and it's unlikely there will be new developments involving the old rail textures. Of course, the NAM team does not keep people from creating Maxis-style textures for new content. - When will feature x be released?
As per usual NAM Team policy, there is no fixed schedule for development. - Can I uninstall the RRW and go back to the old textures?
Yes, you can. Re-run the NAM installer and de-select the RRW option; the installer will do the work for you. However, if you have RRW in existing cities, the network will become "invisible" upon removal of the RRW mod. They simply return by clicking on them again (this process is identical to the initial conversion and likewise excludes puzzle pieces). - How about lot textures and lot support? Will there be compatible railyard textures?
Supporting existing content has always been a primary concern for the developers, and full compatibility is aimed for. Maxis lot textures are included in the mod. Third-party textures are not covered; their conversion to RRW is the responsibility of their respective creators. This can be done in cooperation with the RRW developers if so desired. - Are our DTR stations compatible?
Most of them are, since geometrically, the outside rails remain unchanged (the narrowing occurs with the inner rails). Unfortunately, a few popular stations have rail textures that are part of the BAT. This can only be solved if the original BAT creator releases an updated station, preferably with the rails as lot textures instead. - Are Triple track and Quad track (TTR and QTR) still slated for development?
Very likely, but there is no schedule for this. - Will there be compatible tunnels and bridges?
Very likely, but there is no schedule for this. - Which features will make it into the next NAM?
We like to surprise people ;D - Who is making this mod?
The RRW is a NAM Team project. Refer to the manual for a full list of contributors.
HERE (https://www.dropbox.com/s/u4iscna9w0esmti/Swordmaster%20RealRailway%20master%20textures.zip?dl=0) are the master textures for the first RRW version (.xcf versions included, split by layer).
If you use these, credit the NAM Team please.
&apls
Will the RRW consist of the retexture for DTR, or are STR & TTR factored in as well?
should've read the faq first! $%Grinno$%
still, gotta love the acronyms! :D
cooool stuff dudes, I'll be watching $%#Ninj2
Nice work, Willy and the rest of the team. You never cease to impress. :thumbsup: I was wondering what had happened to the RAM, but I guess it will no longer be needed when the RRW is released.
%BUd%
Yes... I'm excited. ;D
This is great. I am applaouding and (im)patiantly following the progress.
:satisfied:
At last, the Railways get the love and treatment they deserve :thumbsup:
Exiting news! I can't wait to give my railways more realism. ;D
Here's hoping PEG updates now (3+ lots)
Wiimeiser, can you give me a specific lot name so I can check?
Teaser time:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw_teaser1.jpg&hash=b99e4b0b47a33dadb9d9c81549d5a9ed6c862cac)
Cheers
Willy
Very nice!!!exciting project
Those textures are amazing.. shame to hear the TTR and QTR have been bumped down the priority list though.
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 15, 2013, 03:54:21 PM
Wiimeiser, can you give me a specific lot name so I can check?
The ones I'm specifically referring to are Peg's Pine Trails, Logging Trails and SPAR roads, each set has a rail crossing lot.
Well then this is a surprise! After the RAM went into hiatus I thought it might be years until railways were revisited but here is the RRW all new and fancy! Another acronym to add to the list aye!
Quote from: Kitsune on June 15, 2013, 05:13:25 PM
Those textures are amazing.. shame to hear the TTR and QTR have been bumped down the priority list though.
TTR was in the midst of a major overhaul when Dedgren disappeared again and QTR never got past the prototype stage.
Don't worry, hopefully there'll be some other unreleased old, forgotten RAM content making it into this ;)
So you guys are never running out of ideas? This is very impressive.
The textures are absolutely gorgeous, but in my opinion it was a mistake not to include shiny parts of metal to the rails. Although it gives an overall nice "vintage" feel, I'm curious how well it will blend with modern, high-density settings.
A small question: how about crossing compatibility with other NAM plugins and texture overrides? (Euro Textures hint hint...)
It's an understandable opinion Magneto. I'm only gonna explain this once.
The shiny railhead should be represented only at zoom 6. Inclusion in higher zooms gives the following effect:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw_shinyrails.jpg&hash=449d938a1833c2bc9d22a190365563279c565a94)
This is just an indecipherable blur. This is because of the changed color scheme of ballast rock and ties. It can be ameliorated either by changing the color scheme (moot), or adding additional shading, which will have the effect of making the rails look twice as wide (moot as well). Dark railheads were chosen primarily as a feature (increased contrast at higher zooms), not as a defect.
Like said in the FAQ, HD textures are not on the books. Nor is any texture variation, at least not on my part. Everyone is free to take their stab at doing this. I'm always open to suggestions but I'm not gonna spend any more time on this specific issue.
It's just a matter of getting used to it (call it de-maxification :D)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw_highdens.jpg&hash=9677296afcdb1db453154639cfb9f09c0c6b92a9)
Quote from: MandelSoft on June 16, 2013, 08:27:28 AM
A small question: how about crossing compatibility with other NAM plugins and texture overrides? (Euro Textures hint hint...)
Well, the question is, whose responsibility is this? (Hint hint ;D )
Cheers
Willy
Bring on the de-Maxisification ;D
Indeed, the shiny rail texture is perhaps the most radical change here relative to previous rail texture mods, and it's something that takes a minute to get used to. Due to viewing angle and the other reasons mentioned it is certainly time for the shine to go though. As you can see a couple teaser pics back though, even at Z6 the new textures are stunning. As one of the more HD-obsessed people around here I must say I've been completely won over by the look of these SD textures even at their most detailed--and have really been itching to post a couple shots from NORO featuring these beauties for months now :D
Absolutely outstanding work my friend &apls &apls &apls &apls
That pic with a urban dense enviroment is amazing!I'm loving this mod!
Absolutely loving this, can't wait to use it!
No matter how much my expectations go up I always manage to be impressed by the NAM Team. This RRW project is going to be awesome &apls. RRW is just the ticket for my new rail lines - when this comes out they'll be looking a lot better.
Really nice...
Would it be much work to make european textures, too? Cause they look very american...but really nice work...
Quote from: MR.Y on June 16, 2013, 01:36:37 PM
Really nice...
Would it be much work to make european textures, too? Cause they look very american...but really nice work...
The texture looks pretty universal to me. Remember that it's supposed to be representative of heavy industrial rail, not newer passenger lines and high speed rail. The only thing I would have done is perhaps made the ballast a little more grey than brown.
To me, the textures have a nice old-timey feel — from back when railroads were going strong over here. Modern rail seems to be covered nicely by GLR and HSR, the latter of which is model-based in its own right IIRC. As far as the "shiny" deal goes, I initially thought I would miss the shiny tops, but I understand why they can't be included. For that matter, the Google Maps satellite rails I've looked at don't even appear to have shiny tops. So, these rails are just fine and may be more modern than I first thought.
I find it pretty fantastic. Looking forward to using it!
Nice. Here, Railways are still laid on ballast(except for ICE-lines, that are laid on concrete), as this is still the best base for relatively high speeds. OK, nowadays they don't use wooden cross beams anymore, but that's hard to notice. The colour of the ballast is fine, as over the years, oxidated iron will fall off the trains and onto the ballast. The ballast of a new built railtrack stays clean for about 1-3 years under normal use(2 passenger trains per hour)
Just one question Willy...what about stations?there a lot released but they all have the old maxis texture...
This looks amazing! I know it's very nerve wracking when someone comes up and starts demanding something in the middle of a project this big, so I'm not going to. I just wanna ask are you going to "convert" single track rail, and did you think about making a 4 track rail (in a single tile) like the ones we see in urban industrial areas? I know there is enough room in one tile for all 4 of them :)
First, great idea and best of lucks on this project ;) &apls
and second, some constructive critics; aren't the textures a bit blurred?
Quote from: Vlasky on June 17, 2013, 01:52:29 AM
I just wanna ask are you going to "convert" single track rail, and did you think about making a 4 track rail (in a single tile) like the ones we see in urban industrial areas? I know there is enough room in one tile for all 4 of them :)
All existing rail content (except lots) will be converted, including RAM content like STR, so the answer to the first question is yes. The answer to the second question is a doubtful maybe; TTR and QTR are low-priority at this point. Neither have been ruled out, but neither have been confirmed either.
Quote from: gn_leugim on June 17, 2013, 02:20:58 AM
and second, some constructive critics; aren't the textures a bit blurred?
That's possible. It can't be avoided when making the curves and rotations. But wait till you see it in game.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 14, 2013, 08:42:19 AM
Who is making this mod?
The NAM Team is responsible, but also wishes to recognize the following specific people for their assistance, good advice and support: rooker1, art128, vester, FrankU, Simcoug and vortext.
Hey, listen. This is serious.... It's not my fault! ..... What did I do to deserve this? ()what()
But otherwise: sure, it's a fine project, but I seriously have no idea why I got so much honour to be on the list. Or is this a way of dragging me into it? &mmm
Stop denying (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15223.msg437478#msg437478), it's all (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15223.msg437483#msg437483) your fault (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15223.msg437564#msg437564) Frank! :P
AH, nice to see this project finally has a thread of its own ! ;D
Lovely work, as usual! Can't wait to see how this mod fit in the Japanese neighborhoods. :)
:angrymore: I should have :-[ kept my big :angrymore: shut.....
While we are on the subject of new railways I thought that I might drop these here...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP1_zps5e6ae411.jpg&hash=587c79123d6db4f856f0033ad3fe5ea614d330ba) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P1_zps5e6ae411.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP2_zps88085856.jpg&hash=fa3c5dbc11abb24eb15d0f97c7f2473ead35ff6f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P2_zps88085856.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP3_zpsbf5198c4.jpg&hash=c5e47ba99c728c582fe786a9e45bd7b8c7bedab5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P3_zpsbf5198c4.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP4_zps63032141.jpg&hash=3c9793e7e9f6ca5e30ca6e100617bca5355d7fad) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P4_zps63032141.jpg.html)
Something that has been missing from the rail network for a long time which is of course railway overhead wire. It is still in the prototype stage with only the orthogonal rail being T21ed with the overhead wire and some aligning still needed to be done. It can also run up and down slopes which is useful. What do others think?
-eggman121
Eggman, please take all my money. &apls &apls &apls &apls
Really nice, look forward to see more and the day i can use :thumbsup:
Thx
Christian
Amazing stuff!the real railway is going to be a fantastic release!
My gosh! Realistic, slope conforming catenaries :o And new textures... finaly! &apls great, great work!!
god you guys out do yourselves every time! i can't thank you all enough for making this 10 year old game playable for years and years to come
I was waiting for a lot of time a mod like this, i'm a fan of railways. &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Find the new thing. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fnew_thing.jpg&hash=edc462f526ca9cba0b789d4991e2b88728fac98a)
Nice models, Eggman. I want to see a pic with automata under it.
Cheers
Willy
Oh wow! FARR stubs! And new shock breaker (don't know how they are called exactly) props :thumbsup:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg23.imageshack.us%2Fimg23%2F5150%2F21cr.jpg&hash=78f669aa59d0c94f4e94619d50c44abb07ddfc3c)
Need any more proof that this project is taking off like a rocket? 13 viewers in one topic, with over 1,000 1,400 views already. Let's go! ;D
Good job on the FARR conversion, Willy! :thumbsup: Draggable FARR has it's advantages, doesn't it?
:o
Wait a minute, slope-friendly wires? The lack of slope-friendliness has plagued power line BATters for years now, so it's good to see it pulled off so nicely. Nice work, Eggman.
:thumbsup:
Amazing job guys &apls &apls &apls
And there's the FARR... be still my heart. ;D
eggman just proves that someday... a SAM like setup for Rail would be so nice, because its going to suck using just one of these of textures instead of all of them at once.
Thank you for all the kind words everyone $%Grinno$%. I am amazed myself about adding overhead wire to railways. More to come...
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 17, 2013, 01:02:28 PM
Nice models, Eggman. I want to see a pic with automata under it.
Cheers
Willy
Here you go Swordmaster
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTrain1_zps7e5e391b.jpg&hash=361fdc3b643d17d1f8bed09e46f49e3b38bd7dc8) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Train1_zps7e5e391b.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTrain2_zps82084fce.jpg&hash=dfd5d71f3e80560d5c4d2eea1772c3f9f075a376) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Train2_zps82084fce.jpg.html)
I am using the Millennium set that is used on the Sydney Cityrail network. It is one of the taller sets created and as such is a perfect model to reference.
Now as I said the overhead wire is still a prototype so I think I need to elevate the wire a little bit if the train images are anything to go by. I will fix that shortly.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on June 17, 2013, 07:47:45 PM
I am using the Millennium set that is used on the Sydney Cityrail network. It is one of the taller sets created and as such is a perfect model to reference.
You also have to consider the overpasses. Tarkus made the L1 RHW models high enough so that the tallest known rail automata will fit under them (I think it's in one of Swamper's sets), but from memory there isn't much space. You'd need to make a special model for it that probably doesn't have the upper support wire so it fits between the top of the car and bottom of the overpass.
Regardless, I think they look absolutely fantastic and I think you'd work out a solution, certainly don't give up on it. Most of the trains will probably be overscaled after the RRW is released anyway :thumbsup:
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 17, 2013, 01:02:28 PM
Find the new thing. . .
You know, I was going to ask you yesterday if the new implementation could make that possible ::)
Quote from: jdenm8 on June 17, 2013, 08:56:49 PM
You also have to consider the overpasses. Tarkus made the L1 RHW models high enough so that the tallest known rail automata will fit under them (I think it's in one of Swamper's sets), but from memory there isn't much space. You'd need to make a special model for it that probably doesn't have the upper support wire so it fits between the top of the car and bottom of the overpass.
Regardless, I think they look absolutely fantastic and I think you'd work out a solution, certainly don't give up on it. Most of the trains will probably be overscaled after the RRW is released anyway :thumbsup:
Thank you jdenm8. The models I have created are still under 7.5m or L1. A special case of overhead wires will be needed for tunnels and L1 overpasses and I think I have a solution. I'm still in the process of how to implement the overhead wires since the overhead wires take up four tiles to take into account the zig zagging of the wire. It is still early stages and with my other modding and RL I don't think the overhead wires will be released for a while. Although it will be awesome once it is released.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on June 17, 2013, 09:16:54 PM
Thank you jdenm8. The models I have created are still under 7.5m or L1.
The problem here is that the road surface is at 7.5m, the bridge clearance is actually only about 6.5m.
This mod is looking very good! Keep up the great work.
It definitely looks like a real railway line. :P
Great work so far already! These new rails would look perfectly in any industrial area or seaport!
Eggman, one remark on the overhead wires: I think the wires look a little too bright; could you consider rendering them darker, so they would blend better in with the background? Anyway, nice work!
Quote from: Earwhyckque on June 18, 2013, 03:41:49 AM
Eggman, one remark on the overhead wires: I think the wires look a little too bright; could you consider rendering them darker, so they would blend better in with the background? Anyway, nice work!
Indeed, above all the wires which are too bright/white ;)
eggman121: What is the height of the overheadwires ?
Would love to see how the fit with all my trains.
Have without knowning have done my trains with variating heights of the pantographs:
- Volume 1-2. H=5.68 m
- The last 3 volumes. H=6.55-6.80 m
- The trams in volume 4. H=7.66 m
Not sure if one would be able see the difference, but still....
Quote from: jdenm8 on June 17, 2013, 09:34:22 PM
The problem here is that the road surface is at 7.5m, the bridge clearance is actually only about 6.5m.
Thank you Jdenm8. I have adjusted the top wire to go from 6.5m to 6m. It's good to know what the bridge levels are. Also I may need help with finding the maxis textures for the rails. Would you know someone that has the textures handy? Thanks in advance.
Quote from: Girafe on June 18, 2013, 03:53:16 AM
Indeed, above all the wires which are too bright/white ;)
I was using the wrong colour. It must have automatically changed when I put the wire set together. I'll fix that for the next rendering phase.
Quote from: vester on June 18, 2013, 04:08:18 AM
eggman121: What is the height of the overheadwires ?
Would love to see how the fit with all my trains.
Have without knowning have done my trains with variating heights of the pantographs:
- Volume 1-2. H=5.68 m
- The last 3 volumes. H=6.55-6.80 m
- The trams in volume 4. H=7.66 m
Not sure if one would be able see the difference, but still....
Hello Vester. The height of the bottom wire is 5.25m with a radius of 0.02m. I can't make it any higher unfortunately due to the constrains of the bridges that Jdenm8 has pointed out to me.
Thanks for all the kind words everybody :thumbsup: Although I may need some help with the diagonal T21s. Maybe Memo could help in this matter since it appears that he knows more about T21s than I do. More hands make lighter work as they say.
More to come...
-eggman121
amazing work,keep working &apls
The weird mix up with dimensions in the games :P
People are what 4.5 meters tall !?!
Thing the safety clearance in Denmark is 1.75 meters is overhead power lines.
SO: Please duck when going under the wires, so the power don't "jump" you.
5.25 meters is very low. The pantograph would lay all the way down to the roof.
Don't see any reason as to why it get be raised to 6.25 meters.
The top wired (bearing) would just stop at poles next to the bridges and under the bridges the power line would be hanging from the bridges.
I actually did some calculations based on the narrow-gauge Passenger network near where I live. One of the models of train they use is 3.8m from bottom of wheel to top of the airconditioning units. Add 1m for the pantograph, which is probably a bit generous, and it comes out at 4.8m, below the revised height.
Of course, I'm talking real height and not game height. Knowing the game's whacked-out scaling, it's probably vastly different.
But we're talking broad gauge here. (How about we make a mod for narrow-gauge? :P)
Like everything else, loading gauges are considerably different across regions, but with exception of double stacking clearances (5.5-6.15m), most range between 4.3 and 4.8m. This excludes an elevated pantograph, which is not considered part of the gabarit. On the Belgian network the wire hangs between 5.1 and 5.5m from the rails.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F7%2F7e%2FLademass_EBO.png&hash=bbf69488106adc6803dd10da4bac620ccdd1b978)
(G1 is a European standard, G2 is German.)
For your interest, the tracks on the new textures are 13 pixels wide, which translates to 1.625m, only 19cm off real scale.
Cheers
Willy
Amazing and very thorough job you've been all doing here and all this attention is well deserved. Great job boys :)
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 18, 2013, 09:37:39 AM
the tracks on the new textures are 13 pixels wide, which translates to 1.625m, only 19cm off real scale.
What!? Nineteen centimeters off, that is unacceptable!! $%Grinno$%
On a more serious note, the stub textures look great, as do the break-thingies. &apls
btw, what is the correct rail parlor for these?Eggman, your catenaries are great too. Pretty exciting they're slope friendly and given your traffic signs I'm sure they'll look awesome in the final render! :thumbsup:
I love the railroad track!!!!!! :O
I need to keep a look out on this project. :D
I fear this is going to be one of my favourite threads for the next months ;D Some excellent work both on the slope-conforming catenaries and the new textures!
P.S.: the "stop thingy" everyone refers to is called a buffer, do I remember right?
Quote from: vester on June 18, 2013, 08:43:11 AM
The weird mix up with dimensions in the games :P
People are what 4.5 meters tall !?!
Thing the safety clearance in Denmark is 1.75 meters is overhead power lines.
SO: Please duck when going under the wires, so the power don't "jump" you.
5.25 meters is very low. The pantograph would lay all the way down to the roof.
Don't see any reason as to why it get be raised to 6.25 meters.
The top wired (bearing) would just stop at poles next to the bridges and under the bridges the power line would be hanging from the bridges.
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 18, 2013, 09:37:39 AM
Like everything else, loading gauges are considerably different across regions, but with exception of double stacking clearances (5.5-6.15m), most range between 4.3 and 4.8m. This excludes an elevated pantograph, which is not considered part of the gabarit. On the Belgian network the wire hangs between 5.1 and 5.5m from the rails.
I have adjusted the height of the overhead bottom wire to 5.75m. It will be a tight squeeze between the Rolling stock and the L0 Bridges. The top wire now sits at 7m at its highest point with the top wire sagging down to 6.5m. So for certainty the wire will be at
5.75m
Sounds about right Eggman. While your project is not specific to the RRW, we should tune things so they are fully compatible. I'd be willing to help you out on T21'ing. It'll be a considerable job, though, given how. . . er. . . well, you'll see ;D
Vortext, the correct English terms usually elude me as well. From what I can tell, it is buffer stop in Europe and bumper in the US. Which sounds logical because in America they don't have buffers.
All modeling credit is due to Matt (threestooges), whose help has been and will continue to be crucial in this project.
Speaking of clearances. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw_rhw.jpg&hash=ef3b6ef94780357d6e89a41227eeb0418765e3eb)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fl2-dtr.jpg&hash=e4ed77424f48038c0b84ae47fafc6e3705ae4071)
Cheers
Willy
That compatibility. :O
These are looking really good. I can wait to see some more. :)
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 18, 2013, 05:29:03 PM
Sounds about right Eggman. While your project is not specific to the RRW, we should tune things so they are fully compatible. I'd be willing to help you out on T21'ing. It'll be a considerable job, though, given how. . . er. . . well, you'll see ;D
What would be beneficial as well is the IIDs for the Maxis and NAM rail textures. I spend half my time trying to find the correct IIDs and it can be frustrating at times :'(. Reading rul code and looking up s3d files can be quite time consuming...
Anyways I have corrected the overhead wires and poles (or whatever the are called) as shown below
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP01_zpsd2fa7931.jpg&hash=7a3d8eb4ac4bd13252d628a2afd906c109ec4197) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P01_zpsd2fa7931.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP02_zps2b6d2040.jpg&hash=ed0f71d5885314e96f57bde89f57d68ca2a8aa8f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P02_zps2b6d2040.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP03_zps20641137.jpg&hash=361db1927ee065b42dfa7a852255b653fb7d577c) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P03_zps20641137.jpg.html)
Please speak now or forever hold your peace. In other words this will be the standard I will be making my models to so if there are any changes that are needed please tell me now or accept what I have Batted.
I am not changing models that could number in about 100s of 1000s when this project really gets underway.
-eggman121
The new overhead line color is fantastic, eggman!
I only have one concern about this. What happens if you use another style of poles? For example for my Japanese regions I use Uki's HD Japanese catenaries props. If I put your mod as well as uki's, which poles will be ingame? Yours or Uki's?
I don't mind using your mod at all ( which I really will, I so much wanted that overhead line for a looong time now), but if I can use it as well as a better ( imo ) pack of poles, then that would be the best of the best. ;)
For your information, Uki's poles [link] (http://uki-sim.seesaa.net/article/259839686.html) are also spaced by two tiles, so just releasing the overhead line would assure complete compatibility methinks.
Color of the wires in now good. But your poles are still a little bit too bright (above all pic. 2)
keep going the good work :)
Quote from: art128 on June 19, 2013, 02:43:12 AM
The new overhead line color is fantastic, eggman!
I only have one concern about this. What happens if you use another style of poles? For example for my Japanese regions I use Uki's HD Japanese catenaries props. If I put your mod as well as uki's, which poles will be ingame? Yours or Uki's?
I don't mind using your mod at all ( which I really will, I so much wanted that overhead line for a looong time now), but if I can use it as well as a better ( imo ) pack of poles, then that would be the best of the best. ;)
I based my poles on the Sunbury electrification project in Victoria since I use that Line a lot to go to Melbourne. I can include other pole types provided they are to specification. I have the wires zigzagging between 6.225m and 5.775m with a center of 6m from the edge of the tile. That Is what the center of the Track is for the DTR. Also the Height of the wire is 7m for the top wire where it meets the pole and 5.75m for the bottom wire.
If I had the original models I could make them to specification and Make multiple sets. If you could contact Uki and see if the original gmax files still exist than I could or he could make sets to the specifications above.
I will only be making one set at the moment but if Uki's set of models could be forwarded to me in gmax format that would make life easier for me to mod the poles you desire. That said I will be releasing the props when this mod gets off the ground, (its still early days yet) so people making transport enabled lot stations can include them.
Hope that helps
Quote from: Girafe on June 19, 2013, 02:56:45 AM
Color of the wires in now good. But your poles are still a little bit too bright (above all pic. 2)
keep going the good work :)
Thanks Girafe. Ill fix that soon.
-eggman 121
You used poles with both long and short arms? And you used them on both the left and right hand side in turns? Nice!
I really hope you find a way to deal with switches and turns, as most catenary mods fail to look good at these points. Good luck with your awesome project! (The wires look much better now!)
These catenaries look gorgeous!
Maybe Girafe is right, but I can perfecly live with the models as they are now. Maybe it's important to make an overview in zoom 1 or 2: if the catenaries are too bright you indeed should dim them a bit.
Quote from: Earwhyckque on June 19, 2013, 03:12:32 AM
You used poles with both long and short arms? And you used them on both the left and right hand side in turns? Nice!
I really hope you find a way to deal with switches and turns, as most catenary mods fail to look good at these points. Good luck with your awesome project! (The wires look much better now!)
1) The reason I did this was to zigzag the contact wire. This is so the wire does not act like a bandsaw on the pantograph and provides even wear.
2) Switches and bends will be tricky but I think I have a solution. Ill keep the community posted.
Quote from: FrankU on June 19, 2013, 03:20:56 AM
These catenaries look gorgeous!
Maybe Girafe is right, but I can perfecly live with the models as they are now. Maybe it's important to make an overview in zoom 1 or 2: if the catenaries are too bright you indeed should dim them a bit.
As mentioned above I will fix that now.
-eggman121
Great job, on all sides here!
Man, I'd like to see those overhead setups for Light Rail, since I don't use electric trains for heavy rail.
Quote from: kassarc16 on June 19, 2013, 04:59:17 AM
Man, I'd like to see those overhead setups for Light Rail, since I don't use electric trains for heavy rail.
That will be my next task. It depends what you use it for. Do you use it for trams or for metro rail?
Anyways with Swordmaster's permission teaser time $%Grinno$%
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP004_zps230f32b6.jpg&hash=487fed9d184ccc35a790d15b42bf3f2402399e0b) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P004_zps230f32b6.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP003_zps9dc21943.jpg&hash=9e1214f0864e69ecb4eec6418a116e3ddde0be2d) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P003_zps9dc21943.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP002_zps9e958fa8.jpg&hash=5cf468fe5c35bde572abb467431177a431b96a22) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P002_zps9e958fa8.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FP001_zpse3ab8be1.jpg&hash=aa98c88d152679945762a633b9c114caa782ae93) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/P001_zpse3ab8be1.jpg.html)
-eggman121
Awesome!
yes ... thats really a real rail &apls
Oh my god!!!! &apls &apls &apls
Willy,are you planning to work on some 7.5m content for rail too???
cheers
Guglielmo
Fantastic work ! :thumbsup:
AWESOME!
The overhead line looks incredibly well on Willy's rails!
Quote from: eggman121 on June 19, 2013, 03:10:56 AM
If you could contact Uki and see if the original gmax files still exist than I could or he could make sets to the specifications above
That would be awesome² ! I'll try to contact Uki and tell him about the situation. :)
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 17, 2013, 01:02:28 PM
Find the new thing. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fnew_thing.jpg&hash=edc462f526ca9cba0b789d4991e2b88728fac98a)
I love this picture! Do you think we need end stubs for FAR as well?
Quote from: eggman121 on June 18, 2013, 06:32:55 AM
Thanks for all the kind words everybody :thumbsup: Although I may need some help with the diagonal T21s. Maybe Memo could help in this matter since it appears that he knows more about T21s than I do. More hands make lighter work as they say.
You called me? I'll try to offer my help as best as I can.
The zig-zagging overhead wires definitely have a nice look, but be aware that it will multiply the amount of work. Only few T21s are necessary for orthogonal tracks, but then consider a 45 curve: For the ortho-to-curve tile you will need four different T21s to account for the different offsets of the overhead wire. You will also have to differentiate between flipped and non-flipped tiles. Moreover, you need to differentiate at least between two different rotations of the tile, maybe all four. This makes at least 16 different T21s for a single tile, if I see the problem correctly.
I'd suggest to implement orthogonals, diagonals and a curve piece at first, possibly with prototypes only, and then reconsider this. Don't get me wrong: the zig-zagging is truely a nice detail, and T21 files allow for all the customisation you need for this. On the other hand, Swordmaster can tell you how many rail textures there are.
Quote from: eggman121 on June 19, 2013, 12:20:16 AM
What would be beneficial as well is the IIDs for the Maxis and NAM rail textures. I spend half my time trying to find the correct IIDs and it can be frustrating at times :'(. Reading rul code and looking up s3d files can be quite time consuming...
The Texture Viewer of the Reader comes in handy for this. There is also this database for rail (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=6873.msg218294#msg218294) by
Dedgren. Otherwise, reading the RULs is indeed the best strategy.
Quote from: Gugu3 on June 19, 2013, 06:27:23 AM
Oh my god!!!! &apls &apls &apls
Willy,are you planning to work on some 7.5m content for rail too???
cheers
Guglielmo
That would require modeling a whole new network level, so I'll just say don't get your hopes up. The transit modding community is definitely full of miracles, however...
The wires are looking spectacular eggman, even if they're going to be a pain in the butt to finish :thumbsup:
I do have the experience that diagonal props on slopes can look awkward. Try to find out if that works well first. This is what's keeping me from adding steel barriers on the RHW diagonals...
Who durst drag this into the conversation?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fl1-dtr.jpg&hash=948466f086b04f5ff8ffd1dbe24860a9c568c427)
Miracles? No. Lot of work? Yes. Planned? Some time.
Quote from: memo on June 19, 2013, 09:27:41 AM
I love this picture! Do you think we need end stubs for FAR as well?
I do. It only takes a couple of lines in RUL2 anyway.
QuoteSwordmaster can tell you how many rail textures there are.
Maxis rail (76) + NetworkAddonMod_WideRadiusCurves_Rails_Plugin (69) + NetworkAddonMod_FractionallyAngled_Rails (59) + RailwayAddonMod_STR (160) is 364, give or take a few bits and pieces such as NWM and RHW crossings and the like. As to what will be added in the future, I can't even make estimates at this point, but it may be billions and billions. I mean. . . well, hundreds.
Quote from: eggman121 on June 19, 2013, 12:20:16 AM
What would be beneficial as well is the IIDs for the Maxis and NAM rail textures. I spend half my time trying to find the correct IIDs and it can be frustrating at times :'(. Reading rul code and looking up s3d files can be quite time consuming...
Check PM ;)
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 19, 2013, 03:56:37 PM
Quote from: eggman121 on June 19, 2013, 12:20:16 AM
What would be beneficial as well is the IIDs for the Maxis and NAM rail textures. I spend half my time trying to find the correct IIDs and it can be frustrating at times :'(. Reading rul code and looking up s3d files can be quite time consuming...
Check PM ;)
Cheers
Willy
Thanks Swordmaster
Quote from: memo on June 19, 2013, 09:27:41 AM
You called me? I'll try to offer my help as best as I can.
The zig-zagging overhead wires definitely have a nice look, but be aware that it will multiply the amount of work. Only few T21s are necessary for orthogonal tracks, but then consider a 45 curve: For the ortho-to-curve tile you will need four different T21s to account for the different offsets of the overhead wire. You will also have to differentiate between flipped and non-flipped tiles. Moreover, you need to differentiate at least between two different rotations of the tile, maybe all four. This makes at least 16 different T21s for a single tile, if I see the problem correctly.
I'd suggest to implement orthogonals, diagonals and a curve piece at first, possibly with prototypes only, and then reconsider this. Don't get me wrong: the zig-zagging is truely a nice detail, and T21 files allow for all the customisation you need for this. On the other hand, Swordmaster can tell you how many rail textures there are.
The Texture Viewer of the Reader comes in handy for this. There is also this database for rail (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=6873.msg218294#msg218294) by Dedgren. Otherwise, reading the RULs is indeed the best strategy.
I'm only going to use the zigzagging for straight sections of Rail. Bends Don't need to be zigzagged since the bends automatically do this. your advice is more than welcome and I'll ask if I get into any major difficulties with the T21ing
Wow, looks amazing.. &apls &apls
Is it possible that making a facelift mod that we can change the base tile as we like?
Quote from: weixc812 on June 19, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
Wow, looks amazing.. &apls &apls
Is it possible that making a facelift mod that we can change the base tile as we like?
Making new texture sets would be easy, at least compared to something like the El-Rail Facelift mod. The catenary wires would be a bit more challenging, eggman has a long way to go with the first set. But we'll see.
Very nice work shown in here.
Eggman, as a BATter, I'm curious how you went about modelling/exporting the wires to make them work as well as you did on slopes. If I'm viewing them correctly, it looks like they're a collection of smaller (1m long?) models set next to each other via t21. Is it as "simple" as that, or is there a more complex trick to it?
-Matt
Quote from: MandelSoft on June 19, 2013, 01:29:31 PM
I do have the experience that diagonal props on slopes can look awkward. Try to find out if that works well first. This is what's keeping me from adding steel barriers on the RHW diagonals...
I'm having the same problem too. The diagonals don't want to play ball. There is a tutorial created by budddybud but some of the images he refers to are missing so it is of limited value at this stage.
The tutorial can be found here http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=3650.0
I would like to know what you have tried Mandelsoft. Maybe we could find a solution.
Quote from: threestooges on June 20, 2013, 12:17:40 PM
Very nice work shown in here.
Eggman, as a BATter, I'm curious how you went about modelling/exporting the wires to make them work as well as you did on slopes. If I'm viewing them correctly, it looks like they're a collection of smaller (1m long?) models set next to each other via t21. Is it as "simple" as that, or is there a more complex trick to it?
-Matt
Thanks Matt. The method you described was not used on the Orthogonal wires. But you have given me an idea for the diagonals.
I just used one wire with an overhang at both ends with the prop centered in the middle half of the lot as shown here...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FLot_zps413385d0.jpg&hash=fedd8331c168744ce1b153556eeb3d46e12ffc0f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Lot_zps413385d0.jpg.html)
The value for the sc4.Desc file is set to orientate to slope
true which is 0x02.
The overhang is used for the gaps that occur when the wires go up and down slopes.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on June 20, 2013, 09:03:02 PM
Quote from: MandelSoft on June 19, 2013, 01:29:31 PM
I do have the experience that diagonal props on slopes can look awkward. Try to find out if that works well first. This is what's keeping me from adding steel barriers on the RHW diagonals...
I'm having the same problem too. The diagonals don't want to play ball. There is a tutorial created by budddybud but some of the images he refers to are missing so it is of limited value at this stage.
The tutorial can be found here http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=3650.0
I would like to know what you have tried Mandelsoft. Maybe we could find a solution.
1. I've tried to split up the model. Didn't work well, the models still bent to the other side
2. I made tight LODs. Didn't work either...
3. I rotated the model 90 degrees. No luck either.
Maybe I did something wrong during the process. I think the last time I tried was last year...
This is what I've tried so far...
Best,
Maarten
I am so excited to see this project has taken off. And the catenarys with wires are a very nice surprise for me. Great job, everyone. &apls
Will you provide textures with the mod so that we can update railway lots in lot editor?
Couldn't cutting the wires into pieces like this (blue)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Ff0bde1313e9e6442cad4b4889082b138.jpg&hash=d8734b934ca449f16e2feec5c746df9b918b919d)
or like this
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fd562384e0ec9b683f460f89e9c72e633.jpg&hash=634eae6993ed0b408158ce7269609e643ccfa112)
work, where the bullets are the pivot points and the green line is the kink which will always be horizontal? In the T21, the props would have to be placed minimally off the diagonal, so that they adjust to the right slope.
At last, someone has started working on this!
I've been asking for this for quite a long time, as those "electified track" mods don't look quite realistic with only the poles.
I would like to suggest that in order to get rid of the alignment problems, the solution might not be using (slightly overhanging/overlapping) props for the wire (through T21s), but instead implement it as a network model. Network models are automatically bent by the game, so they follow the elevation variations. For example, take look at the monorail track, esp when placed on uneven terrain. Network models must be 1-Z/R though, not the 20-Z/R models created by BAT exporting. Some more details in this post (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=14278.msg457141#msg457141).
Another point, don't you (all members here) that it's time for a SAM-like configuration for rails (instead of overriding the one and only rail network)? Players could then have normal, track, electrified track, or the rusty track showcased above, in the same city at the same time. I can consider countless more variations, like electrified track w/ a third rail, prefab concrete blocks, rack railway etc etc. If there is not enough room available (ID-wise) we could consider fewer variations, eg 8 or even 4 instead of 16, or even making all those variations puzzle pieces rather than draggable networks, with all their "stability" problems. Please take into account that all this will also require interconnection network tiles (eg normal track branching out of electrified one), in addition to the usual crossings and over/underpasses.
Excellent work so far, and congrats!
Though it's a nice idea to make a SAM like rail mod, the problem is cross-linkage, not only with itself, but also other NAM networks. This also brings up the issue of stability and a lot of coding involved these cross-links...
Not even being a transit modder I am aware of the problems involved in cross linkage with the other networks. However, aside from the problem of crossing overridden rail networks perhaps if this were implemented all road - rail crossings would use only one texture (e. g. The standard texture for that specific road network railway crossing). The problem of stability after crossing overridden networks like SAM networks would remain (potentially solved by just placing another starter on the other side) but should make code on that front much simpler since the intersections wouldn't need special code to account for the different types of rail styles.
Cogeo, it's "only" a matter of coming up with the textures. I don't see why we couldn't take a look at how to implement it if a third party modder were to make them. But I don't see anyone in the NAM team doing that at this point. And the further I expand the RRW, the more work it'll be to make those textures and the more code it'll take. Judging from the SAM's 150,000 RUL2 lines, a full RRW override could multiply this easily.
Cheers
Willy
Not to mention the considerably longer start-up times due to the thereby increased size of the controller. (cough) ;)
Regarding the suggestion of using network models for the wires, this could work, but it would be difficult to achieve the same degree of detail like the zigzagging wires.
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 21, 2013, 09:03:45 PM
Cogeo, it's "only" a matter of coming up with the textures. I don't see why we couldn't take a look at how to implement it if a third party modder were to make them. But I don't see anyone in the NAM team doing that at this point. And the further I expand the RRW, the more work it'll be to make those textures and the more code it'll take. Judging from the SAM's 150,000 RUL2 lines, a full RRW override could multiply this easily.
Sure, the texture work is considerable, to say the least. But I don't think anyone asked YOU to make all these. And while nobody seems to be interested "at this point", some may be suddenly appear in the near (or mid) future. What we could do now is only reserve the IDs (and assign them to modders, if they are interested). And I will repeat my proposal about puzzle pieces, which require no RULs and are quite simpler to make (actually as soon as the first set is made, the next ones will be mostly copy and in-place replacement. Some modders regard puzzle pieces as "obsolete", considering the few extra clicks required to plop them, not taking into account their simplicity and efficiency (and "economy" in resources and ID-range requirements). We can even make some 2-, 3- or 4-tile long straight sections for those who are easily bored. It would be nice to have ALL the above (and addtional) track types in the same city at the same time. And don't get me wrong, most people will actually still want to use the original rail textures, for a variety of reasons, among others the existence of so many stations and other rail-related lots (eg yards) using the original textures (or similar texture packs like NCD's); many of them even have even the original track texture modelled into the station's model. That is, many players will actually opt to rather stick with the original ones, if they are forced to choose. The only way to make them use the new ones, is let them keep the originals as well.
Quote from: memo on June 21, 2013, 11:08:21 PM
Not to mention the considerably longer start-up times due to the thereby increased size of the controller. (cough) ;)
Haha, indeed! But if we use puzzle pieces instead?...
Quote from: memo on June 21, 2013, 11:08:21 PM
Regarding the suggestion of using network models for the wires, this could work, but it would be difficult to achieve the same degree of detail like the zigzagging wires.
I can't see why. Can you elaborate? Even if eggman used the BAT (Gmax or 3DSmax) to make these, it is still possible to make a 1-Z/R model out of it, if you select the front and back views of the closest zoom and combine them to get a 1-Z/R model, for all zooms and rotations - we may only need to reconsider the LODshell. And just consider the far fewer T21s this implementation will require.
Quote from: cogeo on June 22, 2013, 09:19:22 AM
Sure, the texture work is considerable, to say the least. But I don't think anyone asked YOU to make all these. And while nobody seems to be interested "at this point", some may be suddenly appear in the near (or mid) future. What we could do now is only reserve the IDs (and assign them to modders, if they are interested).
Does that mean you're interested in doing it? ;)
On the IID assignment front, if it's someone who's not already on the NAM Team, we usually don't hand over an IID range right away. IIDs are assigned based on the type and scope of project. We like to see a proof of concept, proof of ability of the modder (to make sure we're not throwing IIDs to the wind), and have a decent idea of what the project entails and how it fits in with everything else, before we assign anything.
Quote from: cogeo on June 22, 2013, 09:19:22 AM
And I will repeat my proposal about puzzle pieces, which require no RULs and are quite simpler to make (actually as soon as the first set is made, the next ones will be mostly copy and in-place replacement. Some modders regard puzzle pieces as "obsolete", considering the few extra clicks required to plop them, not taking into account their simplicity and efficiency (and "economy" in resources and ID-range requirements). We can even make some 2-, 3- or 4-tile long straight sections for those who are easily bored. It would be nice to have ALL the above (and addtional) track types in the same city at the same time.
Quote from: memo on June 21, 2013, 11:08:21 PM
Not to mention the considerably longer start-up times due to the thereby increased size of the controller. (cough) ;)
Haha, indeed! But if we use puzzle pieces instead?...
I don't think you'll find many who agree with the idea that puzzle pieces are obsolete--I don't think they are obsolete, for one--though they're not the solution to every problem, and they're not the sole means of moving the game's networking options forward, like they were pre-2007. They're just one part of a tool kit, that also includes various draggable and hybrid ("flex") techniques. Their most effective use is for smaller, specialized network items, where override-based approaches aren't particularly feasible. This was the idea behind the TuLEPs system. Puzzle pieces can be very simple to make, certainly, and they do allow for a much finer granularity of control when it comes to smaller pieces, but that approach leaves all the decisions about network assembly to the end user, whereby they have to assemble things piece-by-piece. For things that are likely to be the domain of a smaller set of users, with an intense focus on a particular network concept, and where there's minimal need for crosslinkage, puzzle pieces make sense. But as soon as you're wanting to add diagonal intersections and interface with other NAM components, the required number of pieces skyrockets, running the risk of tedium for both the modder and the end user.
The simple fact is that no matter where you add content, it's going to add up to lines of some sort of RUL code in the NAM Controller. If I were to completely convert the RealHighway system to puzzle pieces, and remove the draggable code, all I'd be doing is shifting a massive hunk of functionality from one RUL to another. We'd still be discussing hundreds of thousands to millions of lines of code--it'd just be in RUL0 instead of RUL2. I don't know the exact math of how many puzzle pieces it would take to cover everything that's available through the draggable system--at least 10,000 would be a safe bet--but suffice to say, it'd likely end up being a wash with respect to load time and memory consumption.
Quote from: cogeo on June 22, 2013, 09:19:22 AM
And don't get me wrong, most people will actually still want to use the original rail textures, for a variety of reasons, among others the existence of so many stations and other rail-related lots (eg yards) using the original textures (or similar texture packs like NCD's); many of them even have even the original track texture modelled into the station's model. That is, many players will actually opt to rather stick with the original ones, if they are forced to choose. The only way to make them use the new ones, is let them keep the originals as well.
The RRW in many ways is like the Project Symphony effort. Thus, by virtue of that, it makes the most sense as an "all-or-nothing" conversion.
-Alex
^ In summary, while it would be delightfully wonderful to have a SAM-like setup for everything, it would be a pain in the butt, so no. :thumbsup:
In the meantime, I think we need moar updates...how goes it, Willy and Eggman?
Quote from: cogeo on June 22, 2013, 09:19:22 AM
Quote from: memo on June 21, 2013, 11:08:21 PM
Regarding the suggestion of using network models for the wires, this could work, but it would be difficult to achieve the same degree of detail like the zigzagging wires.
I can't see why. Can you elaborate? Even if eggman used the BAT (Gmax or 3DSmax) to make these, it is still possible to make a 1-Z/R model out of it, if you select the front and back views of the closest zoom and combine them to get a 1-Z/R model, for all zooms and rotations - we may only need to reconsider the LODshell. And just consider the far fewer T21s this implementation will require.
I was referring to the fact that adjacent straight tiles would be different. In fact, there would be four different rotatory tiles/models. These would have to have different IIDs, which is why it would be difficult to implement this via INRULs/Overrides. Though, I had not realized you were talking about puzzle pieces. It would then be quite possible to have four different straight tiles (e.g. combined in a 4x1 puzzle piece), but then you would also need four different railXroad crossings, for instance, like you will need four different copies of any other intersection. Just because of the overhead wires. Thus, T21s are far more suitable for this, if you asked me.
Quote from: cogeo on June 22, 2013, 09:19:22 AM
Some modders regard puzzle pieces as "obsolete", considering the few extra clicks required to plop them, not taking into account their simplicity and efficiency (and "economy" in resources and ID-range requirements).
Maybe, puzzle pieces are simpler, but I disagree in terms of efficiency, at least not in terms of ID-range requirements. If you are talking about 10, 15 or maybe 20 puzzle pieces, then yes, the ID-range requirements will be minimal and the implementation and usuage will be simple. But then, if you were to implement the same functionality by draggable means, it would be just as simple and would require even less IDs. The reason for the large amount of IDs for draggable networks is the tons of crosslinkages, you would not even think about when implementing puzzle pieces. ID restrictions of puzzle pieces would soon turn obstructive.
Also consider the following ID-problem of puzzle pieces: If you have a puzzle piece like [this one] (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/a9136b76da46cc6891d5ecc109f9639f.jpg), you would need a 4x4-block of IDs for a puzzle piece, whereas - if it were implemented by draggable means - it would require only 3 IDs because you could rotate and mirror the tiles in order to re-use identical tiles where possible.
I agree with both Memo and Tarkus on this matter. A SAM setup would also have electrified trains running on un-electrified track ()what() and the extra RUL2 code would burden and already overburdened system. There is also a slight gauge change if the texture that Swordmaster sent me are anything to go by.
The only solution I think is possible is to use the monorail/HSRP/BTM as an electric only network and maybe use the EL-Rail for both networks or using the monorail network to trigger paths on the rail network for both electric and non-electric networks if you know what I mean. But that I believe would only add more RUL code to an already overloaded system and or would sacrifice one or both of the El-rail or monorail networks for a single purpose. I agree wholeheartedly with Tarkus on this matter. it's an all or nothing conversion like project symphony that replaced the MHW and the electrification is the same. You either use it or you don't. I'm just thinking out loud here.
But I am interested in the model Idea for the slopes of the rail however if true 3d models can be t21ed onto a network or if they can be spaced out with models reoccurring every 4th tile on a diagonal run. crossing with other networks can be still t21ed normally thought since they are all flat so they can use the normal gmax rendered models.
I am getting closer to a solution on t21ing the diagonals however with the images that memo showed me. I would also like to remind people that the concept of electrified rail is still a prototype and much work needs to be done before I decide to make a real mod out of this. Once I figure out how to get the diagonals to work I can move on from there.
On that matter I think that using true 3d models may necessitate the mod becoming a NAM project since it would need an exemplar range to create the s3d props. I know a fair bit about replacing textures, fixing textures, t21ing and creating models but there is a lot I have to learn. I am more than happy to work with the NAM team on electrifying the rail network since there is a lot of interest in it from the posts I have read but that's up to higher powers.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on June 23, 2013, 01:34:58 AM
But I am interested in the model Idea for the slopes of the rail however if true 3d models can be t21ed onto a network or if they can be spaced out with models reoccurring every 4th tile on a diagonal run. crossing with other networks can be still t21ed normally thought since they are all flat so they can use the normal gmax rendered models.
Unfortunately, it does not work that way. True 3d models cannot be T21ed onto the network, as far as I know, but only props can. Or rather: if you T21 true 3d models, they will behave the same as props, i.e. they become shorter on slopes.
The network's models themselves can(/must) be true 3d, like the monorail network, for example. However, what I tried to explain in my previous post, is that you cannot alternate 4 different tiles because the game cannot distinguish between them. You could at most distinguish between two different diagonal tiles, but only one orthogonal tile. It has to do with how the INRULs work.
Quote from: cogeo on June 22, 2013, 09:19:22 AM
Even if eggman used the BAT (Gmax or 3DSmax) to make these, it is still possible to make a 1-Z/R model out of it, if you select the front and back views of the closest zoom and combine them to get a 1-Z/R model, for all zooms and rotations - we may only need to reconsider the LODshell.
Also, I forgot to mention in my previous post that I don't see how your method of converting a 20-Z/R model into a 1-Z/R model could possibly work. For the 20-Z/R model, the BAT is
projected onto a box, which means losing the 3d-data. If you try to put it into a 1-Z/R model, the perspective will be absolutely distorted.
Quote from: Tarkus on June 22, 2013, 06:24:00 PMThe RRW in many ways is like the Project Symphony effort. Thus, by virtue of that, it makes the most sense as an "all-or-nothing" conversion.
Technically that is correct, but there's a difference in their reason of existence. The primary aim for PS is to allow MHW and RHW to be compatible, and therefore, PS can be classified as a largely aesthetic mod, with a number of functional additions to make it work. The RRW, on the other hand, will mostly concern functional expansion of the rail network, while it happens to have a different texture. This is a subtle difference that is hardly noticeable at this point, but that I think will become clearer later on as the scope of this mod gets more shape.
There's a side-effect of this, namely that re-texture mods (or even full-blown SAM-like overrides) for the RRW are not a feckless idea. The RRW's goal is to implement additional functionality, and users should be allowed to have the texture of their dreams go with it. However, any such texture obviously needs to have the same technical specs as the current one, and this explicitly excludes the Maxis texture. In this regard, it is like Alex said a "take it or leave it" mod, where you have to choose either the new functionality or the old Maxis style textures. But the creation of additional texture sets is not my job, at any rate.
As for compatibility, this will in large part depend on the creators of custom content. Simple stations like marrast's pose no problem. These are a majority.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw_station.jpg&hash=040b7139dead148fe4fd5871fb0cbdf0f85976ad)
If you have created your own textures to go with your lots, then either you give me permission to create replacement textures or you update them yourself. If you have models with baked-in textures, you'll have to export a new BAT with new textures, or preferably without any textures baked in at all. Any other outcome will leave users standing in the cold.
But most of all, this is a forward-looking mod. I'm not gonna sit with my head in my hands because I feel tied by ten years worth of subdued rail modding. Large efforts have been undertaken to create realistic road networks, flora, terrain, BATs and so forth, so unless we concede that the realism-oriented SC4 player eschews rails, we have to go through a bit of trouble to improve the situation on this front. It will mostly be up to the rest of the community to either embrace this or reject it. I'm only playing my part as a transit modder.
Cheers
Willy
What is this new functionality you are talking about?
This happy family of draggable switches, for instance.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fdtr-a1-switches.jpg&hash=0df709e5311554fc52ba106c1229aca7da6b5b81)
Sidenote: if you're not following memo's explanation of IID conservation above, they consist of only 13 different tiles.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fdtr-a1-textures.jpg&hash=2fa5deecd5b327dc538d1c4e02fa36c4dd0ba343)
Puzzle pieces for this would require every such variant setup to occupy a new string of IIDs.
Cheers
Willy
Nice work on the switches, Willy...
But what makes me twitch is which switch is which? :D
Quote from: Swordmaster
This happy family of draggable switches, for instance.
:party:
good stuff!
I have few questions regarding the re-texturing
I have a Vnaoned's project in the hands:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fa3a334b0f1532a2c094705fbd574a0d5.jpg&hash=79a9493230a8259535db2f07adb1b5c013c0cbf1)
I would be glad to use the future textures and here comes my questions. I imagine that the mod will not overwrite LE texture (which is an overlay 0x03031500). So will the texture be available under LE and a polemic question when?
Same thing regarding the wires and the poles. It could be good to export them into a propspack for LOTters.
Anyway good stuffs.
So many beautiful things since I was here last :o Fantastic work to say the least Willy :thumbsup:
Great work on the catenaries as well eggman121 &apls
Again I'll mention Peg's three path systems and their respective crossings. Oh, and Simgoober's Canal bridge, but that's pretty useless.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on June 23, 2013, 05:25:24 PM
Again I'll mention Peg's three path systems and their respective crossings.
PEG or someone at SimPeg with permission to modify Peg's content will have to do them. He has a strict no-modification policy and has put it on basically every page of his website (Or at least the PLEX).
Quote from: Girafe on June 23, 2013, 02:16:46 PM
I imagine that the mod will not overwrite LE texture (which is an overlay 0x03031500).
I imagine that the standard lot textures will be overridden. That would probably include the most used base and overlay textures. If it uses SC4's built-in overlay (If it has one, I don't know), I imagine it'll be compatible.
It's things like Island platform stations I'd be more worried about since they can use one of multiple Island Platform rail textures, none of which are from SC4 itself.
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 23, 2013, 08:43:31 AM
But most of all, this is a forward-looking mod. I'm not gonna sit with my head in my hands because I feel tied by ten years worth of subdued rail modding. Large efforts have been undertaken to create realistic road networks, flora, terrain, BATs and so forth, so unless we concede that the realism-oriented SC4 player eschews rails, we have to go through a bit of trouble to improve the situation on this front. It will mostly be up to the rest of the community to either embrace this or reject it.
Bravo! And I would encourage the RRW team to continue along this idea in their developments. This certainly isn't the first time that a major project has sought to redefine, and dare I say, elevate the standards to which some particular group of custom content is created. By the nature of this type of project, there will always necessarily be some older releases that simply get left behind. But I think history has shown that the community will step up to fill in the gaps, whether by updating older releases, or creating new ones that fit into the RRW scheme.
That said, I'm thrilled to see this project has found new life, and I'll definitely be watching to see what comes out of this.
OMG!!!Willy this is simply amazing! &apls
I take it those single tracks are bidirectional?
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 23, 2013, 10:59:21 AM
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fdtr-a1-switches.jpg&hash=0df709e5311554fc52ba106c1229aca7da6b5b81)
That's a beautiful pic.....made my Monday morning all that much better.
Great work Willy!!
Robin
Thanks for the continued support everyone.
Quote from: Girafe on June 23, 2013, 02:16:46 PMI would be glad to use the future textures and here comes my questions. I imagine that the mod will not overwrite LE texture (which is an overlay 0x03031500). So will the texture be available under LE and a polemic question when?
The default orthogonal DTR texture is 0x263d2000 in the lot editor. If you use that one on the lot, it'll get overwritten with a RRW installation. Like JD said, the mod will include the default lot textures as the marrast station pictured above shows.
Quote from: Meastro444 on June 24, 2013, 04:27:57 AMI take it those single tracks are bidirectional?
There's nothing new about the single tracks here, so yes, they will be bidirectional like the originals.
Cheers
Willy
Great work!
Oh, those switches are nice! &apls
Can you already tell what else is in store, in terms of new functionality?
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 23, 2013, 10:59:21 AM
Sidenote: if you're not following memo's explanation of IID conservation above, they consist of only 13 different tiles.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fdtr-a1-textures.jpg&hash=2fa5deecd5b327dc538d1c4e02fa36c4dd0ba343)
Although I don't know anything about modding or coding, these tiles seem intriguing to me. So please excuse me if I'm asking stupid questions, but would it be rewarding to find a solution for these kinds of problems:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6697138/SC4/wissel-1.jpg)
This layout is something I could really use... Of course, it would change the layout and organisation of the tiles a lot, but could it also be turned something like this:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6697138/SC4/wissel-2.jpg)
Is it worth the effort? Or isn't it even a problem at all ()what() I'm quite curious how these issues are handled, though I can imagine it is just a matter of extra tiles...
Anyway, good luck with this project! I'll keep an I on it! :)
I'm afraid that setup wouldn't work. The DTR is two-way (with each track going a different direction), much like standard Roads. Trains would never be able to use the crossover you have there unless it crossed all four tracks. Of course, it would require additional textures on top of all of that.
Yeah, think about the traffic directions. You've got trains going onto the wrong track.
Al right, you would need at least one other switch to get the trains onto the right track... Those already exist though ;) Consider it a STR from one dual track to the other, or to another STR. I admit it would serve mainly a cosmetic purpose, but it's just something that would be useful.
EDIT: on the other hand, apparently something is already on its way ;)
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15529.msg462552#msg462552
Amazing switches Willy!!!just checked out in the noro cooperative...wonderful &apls
Quote from: vortext on June 24, 2013, 02:58:24 PMCan you already tell what else is in store, in terms of new functionality?
Not really. It'll only manage to upset people when it ends up not being included. In the long term, anything that makes sense and is technically possible should find its way in.
Good thinking Earwhyckque, but due to the nature of DTR-STR switches you can't reuse the textures for this type of setup. So a few new textures will come into play for this (easy enough). It's a very basic line crossover so it's quite high priority. I had already done the double line crossover, which does reuse the tiles of the DTR-DTR switch.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-double-line-crossover.jpg&hash=f1e616ab48ad532a4b5c690ff3807ebb7f20d47e)
As for what metarvo and IndianaJoe said, there's not really a "right" and "wrong" direction on a track like there is on a road. Often times tracks are signalled in both ways, and if not, traffic is allowed under well-defined circumstances to run against the normal direction. This is to allow half of a DTR line to be closed for track maintenance, or even to let one train overtake the other. In some areas trains need to run in the "wrong" direction for a while to get to a switch to branch off the main line. In game terms, it's easy enough to let trains make the switch if you put the DTR crossover piece immediately in front of this setup.
Cheers
Willy
Of course it would be feasible in real life. I was just saying that, in the game, it isn't pathed like that. I guess it could be purely cosmetic. But those full switches look nice!
Willy this project is intriguing!everytime you post a picture is a big surprise &aplsI'm living in London at the moment and I'm fascinated by the rail system they have here...It's been a few months now that I've been looking forward to building something similar in the game...and you're making thais possible ;D
a big thank you
cheers
Guglielmo
@Indiana Joe, that's why you need the crossover piece like I said:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fcrossover-pathing.jpg&hash=b3f653c42bccf6e9a3e1eb8660caa3229aa5dfa1)
Cheers
Willy
I feel enlightened &idea I never understood exactly what those were for. I just hardly ever use STR.
I've been away lately but this is a great project! I was rather shocked by the colors choice but i'm starting to like it. Will certainly look great in my regions :)
Are X's finally going to be possible between two side by side dtr's?
So technically using a crossover piece it would be possible to have a DTR to 2 STR transition?Like the RHW2 to 2MIS puzzle piece?
cheers
Guglielmo
This whole project is looking awesome. Keep up the great work.
Love what you have done with the paths, keep up the good work. :D
How close is too close?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Ffa-3-proximity.jpg&hash=cd3c458cb03a8a7db4b802f7d689c173c5f92a24)
Quote from: Kitsune on June 25, 2013, 03:17:30 PM
Are X's finally going to be possible between two side by side dtr's?
That's what you see in the picture, I think, unless I misunderstand what an "X" is.
Quote from: Gugu3 on June 26, 2013, 03:12:07 AMSo technically using a crossover piece it would be possible to have a DTR to 2 STR transition?Like the RHW2 to 2MIS puzzle piece?
cheers
Guglielmo
A DTR to 2xSTR splitter is certainly planned.
Quote from: Aaron Graham on June 26, 2013, 06:18:15 AM
Love what you have done with the paths, keep up the good work. :D
Thanks Aaron, but there's no new pathing in that picture. All standard NAM/RAM content there (except textures of course). I've yet to begin on pathing. Any volunteers? ;D
Cheers
Willy
That looks FAR better than the old textures. :P
Good luck with the pathing. :)
Great Work Swordmaster :thumbsup:. I have had RL for a few days so it is great that this project is steaming along (no pun intended)
Alright back to the electrification
After several days of &mmm , :'( and :angrymore: I managed to get the diagonals to work. It was a tough job and this part of the project drove me insane but now we have diagonals.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDiagonalP1_zps70c92e83.jpg&hash=447845491178b82f77dd409c3e3ea37ab6149ab5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/DiagonalP1_zps70c92e83.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDiagonalP2_zps3b753df8.jpg&hash=b4004c0f1448b5b98f548016e8de6802c4840a1d) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/DiagonalP2_zps3b753df8.jpg.html)
They also slope conform
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDiagonalP3_zps895b30e4.jpg&hash=a3375fa7c6303ea4113f0233ac5434207886ae0b) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/DiagonalP3_zps895b30e4.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDiagonalP4_zps16455046.jpg&hash=52a4283d86dccd772533305ce648b94a4898d9fc) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/DiagonalP4_zps16455046.jpg.html)
There is still a long way to go but one of the most trickiest parts is over.
-eggman121
Great work Eggman121! These will revolutionize the game. I hope you can work out how to do the curves. :)
Development is really coming along!
Hi Eggman,
I hope you found your sanity back? If not: take a look under your bed. It's probably hiding there. ?=mad)=
Anyway: this is outstanding!
WOOOOOOW :P ::)
Guglielmo
Thanks for the comments guys :thumbsup:
Quote from: FrankU on June 27, 2013, 01:41:05 AM
Hi Eggman,
I hope you found your sanity back? If not: take a look under your bed. It's probably hiding there. ?=mad)=
I think you will find au $600 worth of HO scale train set under my bed lol. Have no where else to put it :D
Huh, I stored mine in boxes in the attic.. Don't know if they still work, they have been stored for more than 30 years by now. And I have moved them through about 6 houses during my adult life.
awesome work, both of you!! &apls &apls
that's some seriously awesome work guys!
Amazing Work Willy and Eggman! :thumbsup:
The work that you guys are doing.... just blows my mind! :o
That looks pretty close Willy &apls &apls It's fun thinking about the footprints.
Great work on the diagonals, especially with the slopes Eggman :thumbsup:
Wow! This incredibly impressive! With this kind of quality and knowledge the NAM team could probably pull off a rebirth of the old Transport Tycoon games hahaha!
Keep up the amazing work! &apls
^ True that :) Is someone willing to mod the OpenTTD simulation into SimCity 4, using the incredible stuff that is produced here? ;)
Willy, one remark on the FARR pieces (sorry to be nitpicking here; they look great): in the screen shots the rails appear to be just a liiittle off the centre line... Is it something only I notice? Then forget it of course ;)
Great work, both of you!
Quote from: Earwhyckque on June 27, 2013, 01:27:31 PMWilly, one remark on the FARR pieces (sorry to be nitpicking here; they look great): in the screen shots the rails appear to be just a liiittle off the centre line... Is it something only I notice? Then forget it of course ;)
Not sure in what way you mean that. Do you see line-up problems?
Cheers
Willy
No, it's just that there seems to be more ballast on the 'north' side of the track then 'south':
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6697138/SC4/spurs.jpg)
Do you see what I mean? It may be only apparent in these pieces, from this angle...
I think it's an optical illusion. That's because these textures are actually flat, but the eye wants to see them as three-dimensional.
Oh, and the reason why I put in the trees is that the attentive visitor might notice the trees are on the same tile as the rails, which also explains how this setup is possible without any new coding or textures. It's a long-standing public request to reduce waste of tiles.
Like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-more-proximity2.jpg&hash=80307315cf3f661592c60fc68bb44203fb383e38)
Which also means this is possible:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-more-proximity.jpg&hash=bbfcf8df591173c2f2a36d8205acd2ecf89ca745)
Cheers
Willy
You're starting to scare me Willy, you know that? I like it. Very nice work, and good to see you've been able to keep as few tiles wasted as possible. It'll still require some careful zoning around the tracks, but it's nice to know we can at least get nature up close to the tracks (much to the joy of engineers who will then be dodging said nature).
-Matt
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 27, 2013, 03:40:21 PM
I think it's an optical illusion. That's because these textures are actually flat, but the eye wants to see them as three-dimensional.
Oh, and the reason why I put in the trees is that the attentive visitor might notice the trees are on the same tile as the rails, which also explains how this setup is possible without any new coding or textures. It's a long-standing public request to reduce waste of tiles.
Like this
Which also means this is possible:
Cheers
Willy
This is absolutely stunning. &apls &apls I see the facelift illustration and that's what I want most from all kinds of the old textured railway Mod.
The developments I see in this thread are nothing short of stunning. I can't wait for these.
Yikes, majhost down. I did it the hard way and went back to photobucket to show you guys today's work.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1204.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fbb419%2Fswm666%2Fcrossovers-closer_zps23ffba16.jpg&hash=085e7626954c430f47814ad2c376ad4816c9d496)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1204.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fbb419%2Fswm666%2Fcrossover-closest_zps9f4cf96b.jpg&hash=1df7a3db4e5d151284b6fb728d3100c7b497def9)
Ideal for your big station approaches.
We are still in the realms of draggable setups, and these two took quite a bit of coding to get right (and two new textures, but since I have the master files split up by layer they were peanuts).
Cheers
Willy
Have the group discussed bringing the HSR mod into the RRW Project? It too is in need of a facelift.
Each time I see new updates, I get more excited. Great work!
And the fact that we can MMP close to the FARR pieces is a real game changer. Great work!
Great Willy!
I will be downloading these rails when there finished, Keep up the great work guys!!! :D
Quote from: Aaron Graham on June 30, 2013, 11:13:46 AM
I will be downloading these rails when there finished, Keep up the great work guys!!! :D
I hope that's soon! :D Great work thus far!
I would have thought that the underlay of the track would have been grey as most places use grey underlays.
UK
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.freefoto.com%2Fimages%2F26%2F49%2F26_49_5---British-Rail-Class-101-Metro-Cammell-DMU_web.jpg&hash=bb8c1d237f210f7388ff126155a55b13d201cd05)
German
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flibcom.org%2Ffiles%2Fimages%2Fnews%2F800px-RE_Deutsche_Bahn_AG_Maschen_GFDL%255B1%255D.JPG&hash=eb8237ad4b02704ae4ac29eedd779087afc3d129)
Russia
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.railwaygazette.com%2Fuploads%2Fpics%2Ftn_ru-sapsan-running_12.jpg&hash=ad318b0e085bc8066a2158adb3b8f64abbf3401e)
China
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F02363%2Fchina-train_2363976b.jpg&hash=f95bb4fdcc0afbfc293892304cd86fabd60ea36b)
US
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.economist.com%2Fimages%2Fimages-magazine%2F2010%2F30%2FBB%2F201030BBP000.jpg&hash=8701814b292a2907fbfd0ed14a957b6a8fdaeb96)
Brazil
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southamerica.travel%2FRailway-Tours%2Fphotos%2Fo1195230538.jpg&hash=70a38167c536b522b1746159fc512392c3518a35)
South Africa
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.johndarm.clara.net%2FWorldphots%2Fza-mooi.jpg&hash=8cebe542de0614a1091de577a32855a9631f71d1)
Just saying
You can clearly see on your German example that there are maroonish ballast as well.
The newer ballast are grey/white, the older it gets maroon.
I understand that the texturing work required is substantial, but I believe that the all-maroonish/rusty track won't be very much popular with the players (esp since it will finally be an all-or-nothing mod), if the current colour scheme is kept. Sorry, but it doesn't look very nice, it rather looks like a simple "Colorization" process was applied. No offence, just fair and I believe constructive criticism.
A more elaborate design would be to keep the top surface of the tracks as they are now in the Maxis (or SFBT) textures (the mod currently makes track looking somehow abandoned, rather than with some rust spilled around the rails), and to use an opacity/alpha mask for the maroonish/rusty layer (superimposed over the original one). That is, the "rust" effect would be attenuating as you move away from the rails. This is not hard, it can be done using the Spray tool to make the alphas (requires a stable hand though). It's quite easy to do, for showcasing it with the straight texture, for example, but Ihave no idea how much work it would be to make the whole rail texture set.
My point is that Your textures look like dirt not gravel underlay
My eyes are probably getting old, but it looks like a weathered grey ballast to me. The tracks especially are much more realistic looking than the shiny maxis textures - From the height and angle of SC4, very little is going to appear shiny.
I can just as easily post random pictures.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frandom-stretch-of-rail.jpg&hash=30d3203326705308a411c9dba32add8608849691)
Hey, my textures look more like rails than the actual rails here! As I've explained before, it's a compromise between how I see rails ten hours a day and how the game handles the pixels. It's not perfect, but then, I don't pretend it is.
Quote from: cogeo on July 01, 2013, 11:04:23 AMNo offence, just fair and I believe constructive criticism.
Actually Cogeo, constructive criticism as I see it would entail making your own texture suggestion and posting it. I've gotten suggestions and pointers from Ron (
rivit), but unlike you he's actually done substantial efforts making his own textures and making it a team effort. Despite your access to the NAM private boards, you've never posted anything substantial there despite six months worth of me inviting discussion.
Cheers
Willy
Anyone who doesn't like the textures is more than welcome to create their own retexture mod, as has already been said. These textures look quite a bit different from maxis and maxis looks quite a bit different from RL.
I think that these rails look 100x better than the Maxis ones. Just be thankful that Willy is spending the time to create these for us. As this is his mod, he can chose the texturing on the tracks. You don't have to use it, no one is forcing you.
I think you are doing a great job and I think the texture look great and a realistic compromise to bring them into the game, keep up the great progress! :D
Are those S-switches (as I do not know the official term) split for each straight track or is it all one piece?
OK, guys, don't get too upset please!
There are several things to say on the subject of reality and SC4.
First: photo's and colours are not that easy as they seem. When you take the same photo on another moment of the day or with another type of weather the colours can look very different. So the determination of the correct colour for the tracks and the ballast can not be done by simply looking at photo's.
Second: the German image shows dark and light ballast. It also shows white lines where the tracks are: the shine of used rails. But Willy had made several prototypes of track colours and ballast colours and most of us agreed that the now used variant is the best for the game.
And of course, everyone can make their own decision and may disagree on this, but it's Willy's project and he is doing it his way.
Third: in SC4 it is not possible to reproduce reality. Merely we can try to make things look realistic and convincing. This can be very different from realism.
Example form another realm: did you ever try to write down a list of random numbers between 1 and 6? Try it using a die, by throwing it and writing down the results. This list does not look random! Real randomness is something else than random looking. This also goes for the game: realistic is something else than realistic looking. Willy is trying to make a realistic looking kind of tracks and I think he is getting that together quite nicely.
But...
Let's not forget that Cogeo is a capable member of our community an I think it is completely OK if he gives criticism or advice without making his own examples. If that would be a requirement for everyone it would make me totally out of order in this respect, because I have never ever made one BAT or texture. Does that make me incapable of giving cirticisms?
Quote from: FrankU on July 02, 2013, 01:16:44 AMBut...
Let's not forget that Cogeo is a capable member of our community an I think it is completely OK if he gives criticism or advice without making his own examples. If that would be a requirement for everyone it would make me totally out of order in this respect, because I have never ever made one BAT or texture. Does that make me incapable of giving cirticisms?
You're right Frank, and as you know I appreciate everyone's input in whichever way it's made. But what Cogeo said was bound to trigger a response. Even a quick glance at the work shows this was no "simple colorization process". You don't have to like it, but if you're gonna call it simplistic I expect you to back it up. If you can make a superior texture, then I'm perfectly fine with having my work called simplistic ;)
Quote from: Kuewr665 on July 02, 2013, 12:37:32 AMAre those S-switches (as I do not know the official term) split for each straight track or is it all one piece?
I haven't really found a proper name yet, but I call them "line crossovers" since basically that's what they are. They can only be dragged in one piece, so no, not split up per track.
Cheers
Willy
This is very interesting and when you complete it, I would imagine it will be a big hit. :)
The textures are beautiful and far more realistic looking than the maxis rails.
It seems the most obvious problem with this mod is the stations with a rail texture in the bat. I know this has already been discussed, I just thought I'd leave my two cents. I wouldn't let this problem bother me and hopefully BATers will create their stations without a rail texture from now on.
Work here is awesome Willy (and company). I actually got used to the new colors rather quickly. Keep it up :)
I understand the plea for grey ballast. And all I can say is: it's not worth complaining about. While it can be a pain in the butt, texture modding is certainly possible to do yourself. :thumbsup:
(https://imageshack.com/scaled/large/21/3axw.jpg)
-Matt
Now that is much better, could you eventually release that
After reading what has happened above, and being lurking around this thread of ages, I thought I could contribute my two cents.
Willy, you have done a tremendous amount of work — I can't imagine the amount of time and effort you have invested in creating textures for every permutations possible on a rail network tile. Personally I have felt that the new texture set you have worked on looked magnificent, and definitely a lot better than the ones we have right now. Of course, there tend to be a lot of debate over the appearance, shade, hue and saturation of the rail heads, beds and etc, mostly because people have different perceptions of colour, and that is further exaggerated depending on the lighting conditions (cloudy day, sunny day... different Kelvins, mostly).
What I felt was a little unjust, was the oversimplification of the process some might thought you have went through with making of the texture sets. I have never seen the mod as a simple hue shift of the default textures, for example. There is a lot of new details in your textures, and there is also a lot of attention paid to how close to real life it resembles.
I would like to politely point out that people have the luxury of choice not to install the mod if they cannot come to a consensus with the colors used by Willy. Members of the community would of course love to help Willy to make sure that his mod is at its best, but I would say quibbling over hues alone is impractical because of how people see colors differently. More effort can be spent on bigger issues (e.g. textures that do not tile properly, missing textures and etc), which so far I don't see any, as of yet.
For those who would love to have alternative texture sets, they are more than welcome to put some effort in making, and perhaps eventually releasing, their own. It would be a win-win situation, wouldn't it? Why should Willy shoulder the burden of pleasing everyone just on the topic of rail bed colours is completely beyond me. Take a step back, and look at the big picture ;)
Cosmetics are, well, cosmetics. One should take it as a pinch of salt :)
It's definitely not simple, it took me the better part of a day just to get that one texture right (and it's just a proof of concept). The RRW project is already over halfway done--there's not going to be any changes now.
I just tried to point out the fact that more sets can be made in the future. With Maarten's RRT Team, there will be a dozen sets of road textures soon. We can do the same thing for rails if people pitch in. (Heh...heh...the RRRT Team :P)
Nice work Matt! I think that's a good start for an alternative set. The only substantial advice I can give right now is to make sure you make a master texture that is separated in different layers (ballast bed, ties and rails). Secondly, work on the diagonal master simultaneously, to make sure you can easily line them up while of course using the same tie spacing as the orthogonal. If you do this well, the rest of the texture work should relatively be a piece of cake.
I can't say or do much more than this right now; work has been done behind the scenes to make a spec doc which will help modders make new sets that conform to the RRW design standard. Right now we're still in pre-alpha mode here, but I can say that over time I'll make my own master textures available, which should help out with any such effort.
Teddyrised, thanks for that well-made statement. I have to add something, though. I think ever since having decided on the base orthogonal texture, I've only spent around 20% of my time texturing. The rest is taken up by coding. I think that should give people a good idea of what the bulk of the RRW effort on my end is at this point. This is also why I've stressed the fact that everyone is free to try their own hand at a texture, by themselves or as a collaborative effort, since it's not my priority, even though I agree with the fact that variations are needed. Functionality first, as is the saying.
Cheers
Willy
I say keep the textures as they are. I can attest to how much work you've put in them. Besides, if folks want grey ballast, they can use the older mods, nothing wrong with that. ;) We need to switch up the colour scheme once in a while, even if it means creating something grittier, dirtier, older and more industrial.
May you two could work together and make one of this two textures in a way like the SAM. I think to make an transition isn't as hard, is it?
@Indiana: Nice work. Did you think about bright, new concrete sleepers?
example pic:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/96971439@N06/9026200412/
(author: me)
regards
Quote from: MR.Y on July 03, 2013, 07:14:57 AM
. . . make one of this two textures in a way like the SAM. I think to make an transition isn't as hard, is it?
That's already been discussed, and as it complicates crosslinking while adding just cosmetics, it's not part of any immediate plans. As per the project's FAQ:
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 14, 2013, 08:42:19 AM
Will you include any texture variations as additional overrides (i.e. a SAM-like approach?)
Current policy is that there will be no additional overrides until the basic network is fully compatible and flexible to the standards the developers aspire.
I'd also like to cite an interesting statistic--in the roughly 2 weeks since this thread has opened, it has surpassed the post count of the nearly 5-year-old Rail Addon Mod development thread, and is approaching 10,000 views. Congrats to Willy on getting rail modding "on track", so to speak. :thumbsup:
-Alex
It is better than the orriginal by far the shiny is unrealistic and sharp bends
Quote from: teddyrised on July 03, 2013, 05:51:11 AM
Cosmetics are, well, cosmetics. One should take it as a pinch of salt :)
You are true about that. On the other hand, cosmetics can be a helpful addition to the gameplay. Personally, I would love to have the great features from this topic put in some sort of high speed rail mod. The aforementioned bright, new concrete sleepers could be an ideal visual signal for such a system :)
On the other hand, I'm quite sure I will not be the one who is going to make such a monorail replacement mod (or something like that), so I'll just watch and learn here ;)
Would a mod on the scale of light rail (elevated and ground) be on the scope of this project, after enough work on the heavy rail is done?
Not even released and I'm already redoing stuff ;D
It used to be this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-oldstyle2.jpg&hash=1dbbab749915091c048c189e62c6dabe2fb2fe19)
Now it's this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-newstyle2.jpg&hash=a520dbbf96fae128a78eb558dda05311ce796f67)
This:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-oldstyle1.jpg&hash=ea3388de8a3147753b6d53b7b0e8dfe99582d5e3)
becomes:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-newstyle1.jpg&hash=af7d095fa9c49681e03927aa102c33f66bd9e3a8)
In concrete terms, the minimum radius for the main draggable network has been nearly doubled to 38.56m. Still a tad shy of the actual curve a main line engine can take, but it's a compromise. It should alleviate most of the headaches I used to associate with the non-wide curve parts. It'll mean that some of the whacky Maxis setups will not be possible with the RRW (a full list will be included in the manual), but also that the mod will fully support the default narrow curves should users (including myself) find it necessary to include them in a setup.
Quote from: Tarkus on July 03, 2013, 10:32:02 AMI'd also like to cite an interesting statistic--in the roughly 2 weeks since this thread has opened, it has surpassed the post count of the nearly 5-year-old Rail Addon Mod development thread, and is approaching 10,000 views. Congrats to Willy on getting rail modding "on track", so to speak. :thumbsup:
Thanks Alex! I think eggman had a role in it as well.
Quote from: Kuewr665 on July 03, 2013, 11:18:26 PM
Would a mod on the scale of light rail (elevated and ground) be on the scope of this project, after enough work on the heavy rail is done?
No. The RRW is heavy rail only. Personally I have no interest (or expertise) in modding the GLR network.
Cheers
Willy
Some nice improvement. &apls &apls &apls
If I may just add a little remarque about a detail, that has gotten my attention.
The shadows of the balast are ''out of order''. A bit. My point is that, the balast is always made as a kind of a hill, it has slopes on either side. So what I mean is, that they should only have the shadowy part on one side of the track, whilst the other is usually even lighter, because of the light it gets more directly.
However the other thing here is how this is done. Which I have no real knowledge about and thus can't say make it so, but I do wish for someone with knowledge, to try this effect. If this can be done ( I don't know how it would look at different angles), than I believe we would hit jackpot. Because the textures right now look spectacular! And those catenaries with wires..
Well done! &apls
Those are looking very useful Willy. You've become quite the wizard.
Nice creation :thumbsup:
The main flaw of the old FARR is that they take up too much space. Now we finally have more compact ones ;D
Quote from: strucka on July 07, 2013, 10:36:31 PM
My point is that, the balast is always made as a kind of a hill, it has slopes on either side. So what I mean is, that they should only have the shadowy part on one side of the track, whilst the other is usually even lighter, because of the light it gets more directly.
It's not possible without either:
A. Having different textures for each rotation. That's four different textures for all except mirroring capable textures, all of which with different lighting properties. We may as well do a really detailed HD render in the BAT and get nice granular sun reflections on the ballast and bake it all into RKT4 models if we're going that route, it'll be easier than modifying the existing textures to have these properties.
B. Actually having the railbed projected off the ground a ridiculous distance (At the moment, the whole thing is slightly off the ground, probably about 3cm and with other layers on top of this in some places). I'm talking 20m or more for SC4's lighting engine to draw any kind of discernible shadow due to the angle of the sun in SC4 (I think it's around about 50°).
Both options will require significant path modification to prevent rollingstock from clipping into the railbed.
Wow, great development is going on here. I see that Swordmaster/Willy is changing the Maxis track geometry. Well I think I will steer clear of making wires for the Maxis curves for the time being and concentrate on the wide radius curves, speaking of which I have finally completed the first one as shown.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWRC1_zpsc1078cd4.jpg&hash=0ff90971592dd754c73660f4233bc628a8925b1e) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WRC1_zpsc1078cd4.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWRC1C_zpscae328aa.jpg&hash=551da06ad3c93ca3325533d7fbb8e58e3faaff00) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WRC1C_zpscae328aa.jpg.html)
Curves are so calculation heavy and take a lot of time to get right but I think it will be worth it. once I have a set (there will be two types) It will be much easier to mod onto the other WRCs.
Keep up the good work :thumbsup:
-eggman121
Looks fantastic Eggman.... not fantastic, AWESOME! I'm in love.
Also, Uki said packaging all the poles will take a few days, once he send them to me I'll forward them to you.
Here's another suggestion.
Is it possible to make some soundbarriers that would work like the wealth sidewalks? So if the rail wouldn't have RES or COM zoned beside it, it also wouldn't have sound barriers, otherwise it would. Maybe even (I'm just brainstorming here) have the possibility to make soundbarriers raelated to wealth and or (this one is omre essential) density. How are the possibilities here?
Great Work Swordmaster, on the improvement as well. Keep it up!!!! :D
Quote from: strucka on July 08, 2013, 07:50:22 AM
Here's another suggestion.
Is it possible to make some soundbarriers that would work like the wealth sidewalks? So if the rail wouldn't have RES or COM zoned beside it, it also wouldn't have sound barriers, otherwise it would. Maybe even (I'm just brainstorming here) have the possibility to make soundbarriers raelated to wealth and or (this one is omre essential) density. How are the possibilities here?
Strucka, I think that that would be a project for a T21 modder, not Willy, as his project primarily concerns rail function. It should be just as easy to modify the .dat file of eggman121's caternaries and add in some of those sound walls as a wealth dependent T21 prop.
The WRC wires look beautiful, and I am sorely tempted to use them even in my non-electrified regions (I use steam and diesel, primarily). Also, the redesigned 90
o corners look pretty good, even though I think that they emphasize the ridiculousness of a curve that sharp. I am waiting for TTR as well, but if even only this could be released (redesign of STR and DTR), it would be incredible. Keep up the good work (and it's all great work, as far as I'm concerned).
it looks better and better, both textures and cantanaries :thumbsup:
Good news. Noah has been helping me out, things have started to run smoothly.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FVarious2%2Fcreepyjob.jpg&hash=bf692b0c9eca3e6891e275b49f0881a1626bc51e)
Cheers
Willy
:D LMAO &apls......Congrats on 200 posts and now I'm getting really hungry!! The Pizza Line.
Robin :thumbsup:
That's awesome :D My pizza's in HD ;D
Oh yeah, and congrats on 200 posts and some amazing improvements to the rail curves of late ;) I can't overstate how awesome the latter is!
Well, there's only one reaction to this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fentries%2Ficons%2Foriginal%2F000%2F010%2F277%2Fgenius-meme.png&hash=0d02ab7f4b754bbb083226a6d4fce328ce79b3f0)
That just made my day :D
:D :D :D
The shadows are outstanding Willy! $%Grinno$%
Jokes aside the new curves are seriously awesome! &apls And draggable I presume?
The catenaries are shaping up quite nice as well. I like how the wires stand out on the RRW textures! :thumbsup:
Did someone mention pizza? Oh, my mouth's watering. :D It's not even fair to tempt me like this. ;D
Oh dear, I don't think I can compete with those textures $%Grinno$%
I have been away, and I see I've missed some cool stuff! (Besides the pizza!) I love the wider curves Willy. That's something I've always wanted to see done to the RHW MIS ramps--there's too much wasted tile space.
But getting back to railroads, I need to finalize my own master textures and get going for real on the grey version.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg841%2F3898%2F03lq.jpg&hash=9db517cdb302778e995252d938ead38f1bf2ad10)
I've taken a liking to semi-shiny rails, but I'll probably end up ditching them when I run into curve problems like Willy. We'll see.
-Matt
will the different rrw textures be optional in the next nam? i prefer pepperoni on my pizza :D
I just wanna throw this out as a disclaimer (and a progress report):
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FAEC9gnk.jpg&hash=8b7b2b0ad34bed02d8c01c37a365fe6a93be6b0e)
We don't exactly serve pizza. (We typically only ever serve one topping.)
You positively must leave that in the final version. :D
(Hawaiian pizza is one of my favorites...ham and pineapple...mmm...)
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on July 12, 2013, 10:24:28 AM
We don't exactly serve pizza. (We typically only ever serve one topping.)
Damn it, was just looking forward to some pizza :P :D
That should be in there. That's probably something Maxis would do...
Quote from: Wiimeiser on July 13, 2013, 04:59:55 AM
That should be in there. That's probably something Maxis would do...
Exactly, it's just like the " Sadly, we've got no Off " from maxis... :D
Ooohh! So no NAM exclusive special 256 sq. m pepperoni pizza? :D $%Grinno$% :P
Willy, I have a question that I'm sure you, working in the industry, have a good answer for. Do rail viaducts/overpasses usually have ballast on them? Maybe it will just take some getting used to, but the new viaducts in-game look a bit awkward. I would think that, being off the ground, there is no need to lay ballast, since I understand its purpose is to keep the ties/sleepers from sinking into the ground or being overgrown. Then again, I can imagine a ballast layer would be the easiest way to keep the rails flush. But it looks weird to me in SC4. What's the real-life verdict?
In England rail viaducts have ballast, mind you they are still overgrown
http://medias.photodeck.com/d20c895c-b84b-11e0-9849-1ba82d23d8d8/Ess8-7203_xlarge.jpg
http://www.rail.co.uk/images/603/original/jacobite-glenfinnan-viaduct.jpg
Stone and brick viaducts would usually have ballast as you see in agunter's pics. Wooden, steel, or concrete viaducts can go either way, depending on the construction methods (waybeams vs plates/tray basically). So the viaducts currently in the game wouldn't work well without ballast, but something like the HSRP viaduct and some of the rail bridges may.
Cheers
Willy
That is the best way to do it, the nam viaducts should have ballast
Excellent, thanks for the info you two. :thumbsup:
hi all, I have an answer with respect to the colors of the ballast, the gray ballast is new and brown ballast is old, the brown color is due to oil, diesel etc. But I have a question, where can I download the RAM?
nope, the brown colour is because of rust from the rails and trains.
asfarasIknow, the RAM is included in the NAM...
a track that is in use usually has brown ballast, whereas underutilized/new tracks have clean, grey ballast...
It's not a separate download anymore--it's in the NAM itself, as an option.
-Alex
Quote from: Flatron on July 22, 2013, 03:18:58 AM
nope, the brown colour is because of rust from the rails and trains.
asfarasIknow, the RAM is included in the NAM...
a track that is in use usually has brown ballast, whereas underutilized/new tracks have clean, grey ballast...
In my research I've found it's not so cut-and-dried. The initial color of ballast has to do with the color of the rock in the region. Just talking about the United States: on the east coast, where most rock usually comes from the Appalachian Mountains, the rock is grey (limestone, granite, etc.) In the Midwest, or farther west, I can imagine rock can be browner or more sandy.
I think it might also have to do with track maintenance. If fresh ballast is added frequently enough, it will never turn very brown. Also high rainfall and good drainage probably wash off ballast.
Take this Google Maps picture for example. It's part of a large rail yard in Newark, NJ, which must be very heavily used. The ballast looks pretty grey to me.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fscaled%2Fmedium%2F194%2Fefyh.jpg&hash=fdcab0180129d58506e51baffce62a4d79b1dd7f)
There's just a lot of variation. The current RRW ballast is probably very representative of most rails all around the world. But you will eventually have the option of grey ballast--depending on when I finally get into the groove of texture making.
That may be true to some extent, but I live in a region where rock is only granite/gneiss, and the ballast is mostly a reddish brown, even though the tracks were only replaced ten years ago.(with Y-sleepers)
What I'd like to see are railroad sleepers made of steel, as wooden ones are not used any more... But as I am a total noob in texture creating, I'll have to forget this wish, I think.
Like I said, there's so much variation. Texture modding is pretty easy if you've got a little patience and even the slightest artistic ability, by the way. I'm technically a noob too; I only recently started. I encourage you to give it a go :thumbsup:
Anyway, from what I've read, steel ties are pretty much exclusively used in the UK. Concrete, on the other hand, is the material of choice outside of North America. How's this for 'Euro' textures?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg823%2F8243%2Fi5hl.jpg&hash=e5d27e6955e94d9189b18c7eee3490755eec4c77)
That looks great :) Here, in bavaria, they normally use steel or concrete, but in some cases, on older stretches, there are still wooden sleepers, for example at the station of the town where I went to school.(I used to take the train twice a day from september 2005 until may 2013, so I noticed some things about the tracks ;) )
Guys, please. This project is not just about the textures, but making the track configuration more like the rails of the real world. So if people are up for doing some texturework, I am pretty sure Willy would mind sharing his texture file for you to work from.
BTW: Think Willy has more experience with rails in the real world than most people around here :P
Here in the UK, ballast is usually a light grey colour when new, but rust leaching from the rails and fastening clips, and general dirt soon turn it brown, so it's not uncommon to see a mixture of grey and brown. As far as rail ties go, concrete ties are the standard for main lines - timber and steel are only really used on older secondary lines. Also, many rail lines, especially In London, use the "Third Rail" electrification system, although new lines must use overhead AC.
That aside every country has different standards when it comes rails, much like roads. I really like the textures Willy has made, I think they fit the game nicely and are a vast improvement over the Maxis default.
I've thought about Third Rails too. It would definitely give an older, more rustic feel to the rails. Many MD/CJ authors would probably appreciate them. At the moment though, that lies pretty low on my list of considered projects. Especially since you would really need some custom train models to go with them. I haven't gotten into automata modding at all.
Besides, Eggman has made some pretty awesome catenaries.
Like mentioned a few times, there are possibly more variations in track ballast color than in road asphalt color, globally. There are a gazillion parameters that determine this: what rock they're made of, how old they are, how busy the track is, what rolling stock runs on them, maintenance practices, weather conditions, and a host of other variables. Also noteworthy is what Frank said, the time of day.
Consider this: there's a big difference in ballast look if a track has diesel, or electric, or mixed traffic. Not only because diesel may leak stuff, but also because overhead wires add to the potential sources of track oxidation. Similarly, freight-only lines are quite different in look to passenger-only lines. Unless, of course, frequent maintenance cancels this out.
Or another one: here in Belgium the tracks are sprayed with weed killer, which is known to discolor the concrete ties, not to mention that it prohibits any kind of greenery from growing too near. This, however, I've been told is not allowed in Germany.
Quote from: vester on July 22, 2013, 03:18:58 PMThink Willy has more experience with rails in the real world than most people around here :P
Well, I'd say Belgian rails at least :D
Cheers
Willy
That's right :) german railway tracks are known for their biodiversity, and I guess that we could even make a national park of them... You'll find canadian goldenrod and japanese knotweed, along with other neophytes, as well as plants that are from europe. There are lizards, etc. and biocides would kill them
@Indiana: Steel sleepers are also used in Germany...You could often find them in Rail Yards or sometimes in curves. In germany There is also a special version of steel sleepers:
The Y-Steel sleepers:
http://www.peiner-traeger.de/MDB/www/Produkte/Lieferprogramm/y_stahlschwelle.jpg
I don't want you to make them. I think concrete and wood are enough, may just with grey basalt and mixed (one track concrete and one with wooden sleepers)
What you also will often find in germany is, thet you have a track with brand new concrete sleepers and the levers just have there wooden sleepers...may something like this would be nice?
But nice work you are doing, I just have not enough skill to do that...
By the pictures it looks like an automata upgrade as well - yes.
There will be in the future the possibility to see the angled rail?
Any news from you Willy??
cheers
Gugu3
No news at all - I've been mostly away from my computer these past few weeks. Stay tuned, though - summer is ending fast.
Cheers
Willy
What an amazing project. This would add realism to more historic areas and industrial parts of a city. Well done!
I am looking forward to the project as well, but take your time.
I have a technical question: Will there be double (ie. quad-track) curves? Because nowadays, a four-track-railway can only go straight or diagonal, but smooth curves are impossible...
Quote from: Flatron on September 09, 2013, 08:56:27 AM
I have a technical question: Will there be double (ie. quad-track) curves? Because nowadays, a four-track-railway can only go straight or diagonal, but smooth curves are impossible...
Check the FAQ on the first page; triple and quad-track probably won't even be included in the first release.
Well, I was not talking about four tracks on one tile, but about placing two 45° curves adjacent to each other in a way that makes it possible to run 2 double track lines parallel and directly next to each other. just like the 45° curves that are possible with the RHW.
I did think that functionality would be useful. Also for splitting parallel lines. However, with single tile wider networks planned I doubt they will be useful for long.
This is late, but on using T21s to add retaining walls I do think it would be a good idea, but I have no idea how it will prevent the other side of the development from getting walls, especially unusual if multiple tracks are parallel.
So, any news for us Willy?
We don't want to lose this great project since we've been going this far. ::)
Quote from: Flatron on September 09, 2013, 02:35:29 PM
Well, I was not talking about four tracks on one tile, but about placing two 45° curves adjacent to each other in a way that makes it possible to run 2 double track lines parallel and directly next to each other. just like the 45° curves that are possible with the RHW.
Running two of those curves next to each other was something I was trying to include in the draggable setups. See this (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15931.msg462742#msg462742) for something similar.
Quote from: weixc812 on September 17, 2013, 07:39:21 PM
So, any news for us Willy?
We don't want to lose this great project since we've been going this far. ::)
No news for the time being. Don't worry, though ;)
Cheers
Willy
That's great :) especially for tight, mountainous areas, where the approach to a station might need to be curved.
don't press the man, he has a L(w)ife you know? :p
take your time ;)
Agreed.
This is possibly more of a RAM thing, but will there be a line crossover for this piece or does this function without one?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbJT3sKf.jpg&hash=586eabd9d61b6da0035db50074f740738377b882)
First of, what an amazing project! :thumbsup:
Even though I troll these forums a lot I managed to miss this one somewhow. And what a miss!
Willy your work thus far is looking pretty awesome, from the textures to the fix and tricks to make the game's railway closer to real life. As a railway fan and future worker, this was something well overdue!
Keep it up, I'll be following this mod's development closely. ;D
Willy, I hope you don't mind me posting some content, but it's nothing you haven't revealed already. People seem antsy for news anyway.
I just wanted to point out and compliment how smooth the rail network looks thanks to your new curve geometry. It's really a whole new look compared to before. Good call. &apls
(Onlookers note that everything pictured is draggable)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg12%2F8064%2Fty1e.jpg&hash=5a8e5a0fb646f6ece4857d08b78c4b631df6dd5b)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg853%2F58%2Fy25b.jpg&hash=e170a49109797881105578f8cfc7e30c836d3f09)
%BUd%
Looking great!
Can't wait to see its final version !
That's really awesome !
That's legendary ;)
:o
amazing!
WOOOOWWWW ;D ;D ;D
Cheers
Guglielmo
I join in with the others:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2Fsmilies%2Fyahoo.gif&hash=bc92bceb79e0b2aff51d41c634bb37455f36e7c9) WOW (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2Fsmilies%2Fyahoo.gif&hash=bc92bceb79e0b2aff51d41c634bb37455f36e7c9)
I think my jaw fell off due to excessive drooling... :D :D :D
I think I will wait with starting my new region until this is finished. Soo good! &apls
Wow!!!!!! I want them now!!!! :O
Wonderful job guys!!! :D
Awesome stuff here! :D
I especially like that 135-degree curve in the first picture! Would be useful for providing minor tracks there.
it is all draggable?? even the trees?? :O great work! &apls
Quote from: gn_leugim on October 03, 2013, 03:47:07 AM
it is all draggable?? even the trees?? :O great work! &apls
:D :D :D @ "even the trees...but seriously, this is fantastic! I want it and I want it
NOW! &apls
Not sure how busy y'all have been, but from what I can tell it just keeps getting better and better.
A question to eggman, who I haven't seen recently: Would it be possible to make those caternary wires available for GLR as well (I'm pretty sure tram lines use overhead wires much more often that rail lines, esp in the US, but probably even in Europe). I know it's extra work on your part, I'm just hoping it's not too much to consider.
Also, those curves (though probably unrealistic) look fantastic; they'll make some stuff much easier, especially being draggable and all.
To answer your question I do plan to place wires on GLR and Elevated Light rail but it won't be for quite a while. I have had to rework my catenaries since I was using props that where offset or off centre from the centre point. The wires are not easy to align since it is like trying to get two pins to align. It is especially difficult when obscure angles are involved.
I did however find a solution.
A tile has positions which are read as a hexadecimal value from 0x00000000 which is 0m to
to 0xFFFFFFFF which is 256m or 16 tiles. This explains why a Lot or puzzle piece can't be more than 16 by 16 tiles. I have nearly finished the right curve. I have calculated the distance between two points by using the lot editor props and divided that number which is 6553.6 or 0x0000FFFF at 1m.
Here is a curve that I have been working on showing the accuracy of the new method of moving props with the hexadecimal values. Many of the props are in segments to align with a specific tile coordinate
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWRC45Reworked1_zps95788a29.jpg&hash=20d763a8e42a0174d3615d4e910c3389a57dad0f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WRC45Reworked1_zps95788a29.jpg.html)
Now I need to thank Memo for his explanation on the diagonals and his suggestion that wires should be straight rather that zigzagging. It is a nice touch but it would have not worked with the T21s.
Now I am gearing up the wires for the Real Railway since I am sure that it will have more support that the RAM and Maxis rails we have now. But this mod won't be released until well after the RRW release since I am not a NAM team member so I will just have to wait until the next official NAM release to digest the new content. Also I need a solution to the level crossing props that will inevitably conflict with the T21 wires that I am making now so I will have to find a way to include the props as part of the catenaries mod that I am working on and a way to override other T21 crossing props that won't be part of this mod.
I have had a lot of RL lately so I have not been as active but help is always welcome for both the Transport Signage Mod and the catenary mod that I am working on now.
-eggman121
Great stuff Eggman!
Great work Eggman! These are shaping up nicely! :thumbsup:
Gee, those look really good, though I'm not sure I ever really understood or appreciated the zigzagging wires. Perhaps you explain to me the benefit of them (I know you've let them go, but it's fun to understand stuff).
I wish I could help with T21 stuff. It's just that I really don't have enough time to play the game, much less spend time and energy on learning how to mod (and summer isn't a good time to start for me either, unfortunately). I understand T21s are usually easier, but nobody (I think) has ever successfully attempted catenaries with wires that were slope conformant before. I am guessing that you've segmented the wires in small pieces and then set up the T21 to display all the segments aligned with each other. Since the individual props will conform to the slope in small segments, I'm guessing that's how you achieve the illusion of slope tolerance?
Outside of that epiphany, I can only offer moral support, and maybe a few insights based on stuff I've read around here.
Maybe Willy can help adjust your NAM status, though? Perhaps to give you a little bit more technical support on the NAM private boards? (I'm thinking NAM associate, seeing as how the mod is primarily cosmetic, though still revolutionary, and highly technical in its setup and execution)
On straight tracks the wires must zig-zag, because otherwise the wire would cut into the pantograph (is it called that way in English?); I mean the thing that is used by the train to make contact with the wire.
Quote from: FrankU on October 09, 2013, 05:38:52 AM
On straight tracks the wires must zig-zag, because otherwise the wire would cut into the pantograph (is it called that way in English?); I mean the thing that is used by the train to make contact with the wire.
In real life, yes.
In simcity you don't need it because you won't notice it, and requires hard modding, useless for what it gives.
Quote from: art128 on October 09, 2013, 06:47:12 AM
Quote from: FrankU on October 09, 2013, 05:38:52 AM
On straight tracks the wires must zig-zag, because otherwise the wire would cut into the pantograph (is it called that way in English?); I mean the thing that is used by the train to make contact with the wire.
In real life, yes.
In simcity you don't need it because you won't notice it, and requires hard modding, useless for what it gives.
Yes, you are right, of course, but some of us apparently are picky about realism. In my opinion straight wires would be perfect enough.
I'd just like to say that progress on both the RRW and the overhead wires are looking superb, great work :thumbsup:
@ Eggman: Great progress on the wide radius curve's catenary. In practise it was a wise decision to drop the zig-zagging as it would be hardly noticeable anyway.
I'd suggest you to keep a close contact with Willy and/or other NAM team members so as to make way for compatibility that, I'm sure most NAM team members will appreciate in the name of realism.
As for the RRW, it's quite impressive to see the difference in realism just by re-pathing the same curves/diagonals. Even though they wouldn't be much fun to ride on in real life (velocity on those curves would not be much more then 40km/h !! ) those curves look a lot more pleasing then MAXIS'.
Quote from: FrankU on October 09, 2013, 05:38:52 AM
On straight tracks the wires must zig-zag, because otherwise the wire would cut into the pantograph (is it called that way in English?); I mean the thing that is used by the train to make contact with the wire.
Pantograph is the correct word and the reason for the zig-zagging of the overhead wire is about right. The pantograph's contact bar is cover with a carbon coating to increase conductibility and assure a stable flow of energy (reducing energy peaks that result from the catenary making more or less pressure on the wire). But the catenary (usually copper based) is harder then the carbon and, therefore would make a dent on the pantograph's contact bar that would destabilise the current flow. As such, the catenary wire is set so as to zig-zag along the rail track thus wearing the contact bar evenly across its length.
Just a little practical knowledge ::)
I'm not really sure what is meant by zig-zagging wires...? Is it about the shape of the wire on the curve?
Quote from: Kuewr665 on October 11, 2013, 05:34:14 PM
I'm not really sure what is meant by zig-zagging wires...? Is it about the shape of the wire on the curve?
If you just have a straight overhead wire (catenary), the wire will eat a groove into the pantograph (the metal-ish thing that contacts the overhead wire that's actually made out of graphite), whereas a zigzagging wire will evenly wear out the pantograph. When you have a train that's whizzing by at 300+ km/h (if you're France) or 150 km/h (if you're the NAM; well, either way, that's really fast), that overhead wire would surely wear out the pantograph, but if you look closely, the wire's actually going side to side and a giant groove doesn't appear... Ever used sandpaper but only used one spot? Similar idea.
If the range of the zigzagging is only a few feet (and at this scale, such variance is often the case), the variance would be too little to notice on a tile that's 52 by 52 feet. Something I learned off of watching a documentary on trains...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overhead_catenary
OFF TOPIC:
Quote from: Kuewr665 on October 11, 2013, 05:34:14 PM
I'm not really sure what is meant by zig-zagging wires...? Is it about the shape of the wire on the curve?
Here, take a look in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rq9b_bn6Bc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rq9b_bn6Bc)
A minute or so in, on a straight stretch of rail, pay attention to the catenary wire. You'll notice that it is no straight with the line but rather keeps switching between right and left diagonals: zig-zag
Ah, I see.
Like Ganaram, I have my doubts that the notorious zigzag in the wire would be noticeable at the scale we're working with. In fact I even hardly notice it in real life. Implementing it would be a hassle not worth it, I think.
Quote from: Kuewr665 on September 20, 2013, 10:29:26 PM
Agreed.
This is possibly more of a RAM thing, but will there be a line crossover for this piece or does this function without one?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbJT3sKf.jpg&hash=586eabd9d61b6da0035db50074f740738377b882)
Yes, a diagonal crossover is somewhere on my todo list.
Quote from: FlyHigh on October 11, 2013, 02:09:28 PM
As for the RRW, it's quite impressive to see the difference in realism just by re-pathing the same curves/diagonals. Even though they wouldn't be much fun to ride on in real life (velocity on those curves would not be much more then 40km/h !! ) those curves look a lot more pleasing then MAXIS'.
They're quite fun to drive on ;D
The basic draggable network (my current focus and probably the first part of the mod that will be released) represents a network with speeds between 20 and 40 km/h that you'd use to build lines in industrial areas or ports. But of course people can use it wherever they want.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on October 12, 2013, 07:08:17 AM
Like Ganaram, I have my doubts that the notorious zigzag in the wire would be noticeable at the scale we're working with. In fact I even hardly notice it in real life. Implementing it would be a hassle not worth it, I think.
The basic draggable network (my current focus and probably the first part of the mod that will be released) represents a network with speeds between 20 and 40 km/h that you'd use to build lines in industrial areas or ports. But of course people can use it wherever they want.
Cheers
Willy
The fact that you're actually paying attention to velocities says a lot about this upcoming mod. Certainly a lot more though went into it then in the new iteration of SimCity! ::)
By the way, is there a prediction on weather this mod will be featured (even though incomplete) in the NAM 32 or is it something we ought not to wait in the upcoming release of the NAM?
As per traditional NAM policy, there's no telling if, when or who. What I can say, though, is that I'm working on it at full speed, and making good progress (unlike before my summer break, when I had hit a bit of a wall).
Cheers
Willy
I read you ;)
We'll being as it may, I'm sure we'll all be following it closely and enjoy it whenever it comes out!
This project is looking great! Keep up the good work.
Thanks both of you.
October is shaping up to be quite an active month on the RRW front. I've been working on getting the basic network into shape, which is actually a lot more than just making textures for what was there before.
You may remember the redesigned curves of which Indiana Joe posted some good examples. We've termed them Mini Curves, to distinguish them from the wide curves. While an interesting visual upgrade, they also required the rail tool to be completely revamped, as curves now overlap adjacent tiles. This was long overdue, since the Maxis code was quickly becoming insufficient, and quite a mess to be honest. I'm currently at 11,500 lines of code -- compared with around 1,000 in NAM 31.2 -- and it's not quite enough yet $%Grinno$%
Some stuff:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fsome-rrw-setups.jpg&hash=538b4cd0cb6c81f446d212f8ab16f4ac51f6157d)
Compare with the Maxis network:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fmaxis-network.jpg&hash=e2d134c032abbf8ac0ae30f39b4edff0f19abcde)
Something more practical:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-station.jpg&hash=1a61db1239012d2df9c3a8311d13c6dd6c1fef07)
Mind, this is only the first step.
Cheers
Willy
Well, I was literally just about to go do some testing as you had requested Willy, but it seems like you've got the mod under pretty good control. $%Grinno$% &apls
That's great stuff. I'm gonna go spend a few hours playing with it now.
Those curves! :party:
This looks amazing Willy! Great job :)
So beautiful! I've just melted away. This will make for a whole new railyard experience. :thumbsup:
This will be for sure a great addition to the game, I love it !!
Excellent work, Willy!
It's hard to overstate how big an improvement this is! &apls
Absolutely fantastic work Willy.
Indeed, what an amazing job &apls &apls
Astounding work. I need this now! :D
Fantastic Willy :o
Much easier on the eyes than the Maxis railroads! I love these!
Yaikes! These Maxis, I always thought they were quite ok.... They are a sore in the eye next to your RRW!
This is so much of an improvement. What is there to say more? Great great work! :thumbsup: &apls :)
you're doing amazing job there! congrats!
I can't believe that I haven't posted here yet (a heavy lurker ;)), but I am very impressed at just how noticeable the change is between the rail textures.
When this project got going I thought it was just another rail texture like Dedgren's or the one made by the SFBT. I was wrong, very wrong.
After sharing the latest comparison shots between the RRW and the Maxis rails, I received a comment from the original creator of the Maxis textures, calling this project an improvement. (http://www.reddit.com/r/SimCity/comments/1ov460/realrailway_rrw_a_nam_project/ccvzu3c)
Keep up the fantastic work! :thumbsup:
Thanks everyone for the comments. And thanks Ryan for boosting this on reddit (and for the KP) :thumbsup: It's interesting to actually hear from the original texture creator and get his thumbsup in the process.
I started the STR Minicurves textures and did some RULing ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fstr-minicurves.jpg&hash=b35aac360a111023454c5c8e8e53432529578cc1)
Cheers
Willy
The curves are so smooth, and the colours are realistic. I have the feeling though that the blockings (what do we call these things that avoid trains from driving over the end of the rails?) are a bit blurred. Maybe you can use the Maxis ones? Or is it just the images?
And another: are you going to provide a small set of textures for lots, so that we can edit our station lots to fit in with the dragged rails?
Incredible work Willy!!
Another step towards perfection for our beloved game!!
Robin &apls
Absolutely incredible work here Willy :O
Quote from: Swordmaster on October 21, 2013, 03:01:16 AM
started the STR Minicurves textures and did some RULing ;D
Cheers
Willy
Seems pretty awesome. I'm sure there's quite a lot to be said about the process of actually turning this into a reality but I'm sure it's a lot easier to mod the STR as it was completely done by the NAM (am I wrong? ()what() )
Quote from: FrankU on October 21, 2013, 03:06:35 AM
The curves are so smooth, and the colours are realistic. I have the feeling though that the blockings (what do we call these things that avoid trains from driving over the end of the rails?) are a bit blurred. Maybe you can use the Maxis ones? Or is it just the images?
I think what you're saying about the rail ends is actually one of the flaws of rendering a small HD model. It is a known fact that these props will look a bit blurry but there's no real way to fix it as it's due to the the procedure implemented by SimFox with the BAT4MAX.
It's a compromise.
Quote from: FlyHigh on October 21, 2013, 06:39:53 AM
I think what you're saying about the rail ends is actually one of the flaws of rendering a small HD model. It is a known fact that these props will look a bit blurry but there's no real way to fix it as it's due to the the procedure implemented by SimFox with the BAT4MAX.
It's a compromise.
Ah, rail ends, how simple. OK. I'll try to remember that.
So maybe that would mean that these models should not be rendered in HD?
It really depends on the mod creator but I don't mind having the props a bit blurry if I can actually understand what they are. Most of the SD props are not really comprehensive. The pixelation is way too severe.
Quote from: FlyHigh on October 21, 2013, 06:39:53 AM
Quote from: Swordmaster on October 21, 2013, 03:01:16 AM
started the STR Minicurves textures and did some RULing ;D
Cheers
Willy
Seems pretty awesome. I'm sure there's quite a lot to be said about the process of actually turning this into a reality but I'm sure it's a lot easier to mod the STR as it was completely done by the NAM (am I wrong? ()what() )
Quote from: FrankU on October 21, 2013, 03:06:35 AM
The curves are so smooth, and the colours are realistic. I have the feeling though that the blockings (what do we call these things that avoid trains from driving over the end of the rails?) are a bit blurred. Maybe you can use the Maxis ones? Or is it just the images?
I think what you're saying about the rail ends is actually one of the flaws of rendering a small HD model. It is a known fact that these props will look a bit blurry but there's no real way to fix it as it's due to the the procedure implemented by SimFox with the BAT4MAX.
It's a compromise.
If anything, I think modding STR would be harder because it's an override network. But that's not a huge factor in the work Willy's doing, and because he's already done it with DTR, I'm sure it's going a bit faster.
The bumper stops are indeed blurry; they are just as bad in-game. I agree they could use some HD treatment, but that's not exactly at the top of Willy's to-do list. If any BATers want to give it a shot though, just say something. ;)
What you are doing here is so incredible and so... smooth! &apls &apls
Amazing comparison with Maxis rail.
STR is looking smooth! :thumbsup:
Something I just thought of, are you planning on making these available as overlays textures for the LE crowd?
Quote from: Simcoug on October 21, 2013, 10:13:38 AM
STR is looking smooth! :thumbsup:
Something I just thought of, are you planning on making these available as overlays textures for the LE crowd?
Affirmative. Read the FAQ. :thumbsup:
Really good job on the smoothed curves and I second a texturepack available for LOTters ;)
Quote from: Indiana Joe
Affirmative. Read the FAQ. :thumbsup:
Oh man, reading is so... hard! $%Grinno$%
Thanks everyone!
Quote from: FrankU on October 21, 2013, 03:06:35 AM
The curves are so smooth, and the colours are realistic. I have the feeling though that the blockings (what do we call these things that avoid trains from driving over the end of the rails?) are a bit blurred. Maybe you can use the Maxis ones? Or is it just the images?
We call them bumpers in the US and buffer stops in the UK (and stootbok in Dutch ;))
The ones you see were custom made (SD) models by Matt (
threestooges) since I needed FA-3 angled bumpers; the orthogonal and diagonal versions were made as well to be consistent. Unfortunately, he's since lost the original files, so he'd have to make completely new models if he were to tweak them further. There's a problem with props this small in that their shadows not always show (at least not on my system). I first have to zoom in to level 6, rotate, and zoom out again -- then the shadows show. This occurs with many different props so it's not really relevant to the topic here, but it explains why they appear more blurry than they really are.
Fortunately, Matt made a US version as well which you haven't seen yet. My idea is to make this an option for people to choose whichever bumpers they want. Volunteers are of course welcome to make their own variations, HD or otherwise.
Quote from: FrankU on October 21, 2013, 03:06:35 AM
And another: are you going to provide a small set of textures for lots, so that we can edit our station lots to fit in with the dragged rails?
See the FAQ Frank ;) In fact this is one of the easiest steps since I can batch convert all textures to the color-corrected LOT versions.
Quote from: FlyHigh on October 21, 2013, 06:39:53 AM
Seems pretty awesome. I'm sure there's quite a lot to be said about the process of actually turning this into a reality but I'm sure it's a lot easier to mod the STR as it was completely done by the NAM (am I wrong? ()what() )
I don't know to what extent you're familiar with RUL code, but INRUL (what the basic network primarily relies on) and RUL-2 code (what the STR overrides require) are two rather different beasts, both with their specific strong and weak points. For instance, something like the OxO crossing requires very little INRUL code to define, but in RUL-2 these are the most code-intensive tiles. But when all comes down I'd say that the required effort is roughly equal for both.
Quote from: Indiana Joe on October 21, 2013, 09:48:14 AMIf anything, I think modding STR would be harder because it's an override network. But that's not a huge factor in the work Willy's doing, and because he's already done it with DTR, I'm sure it's going a bit faster.
I challenge you to learn rail INRULs. ;D Just to give you a teaser: road layouts use seven different flags: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, and 13. Rail layouts, on the other hand, use 0, 1, 2, 3, 11, 13, 21, 22, 23, 32, 42, 52, 62, and 72. Some of these appear to be identical to the untrained eye. Consider the following dragging pattern:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Frail-flags-outside-curve.jpg&hash=1a38a16b5f11a764eb91739daf5bda516b775ab9)
This will place a "13" flag in the middle of the curve, where the arrow points. However, if you drag this curve in this subtly different manner. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Frail-flags-inside-curve.jpg&hash=5c0f9704b94c1a2335f7a6d49883d6d3e31c83f1)
. . . you will place a "42" flag ;)
That means every 45° curve has to be defined by at least two different INRUL entries--one with each set of flags. And that's just the start. For every orthogonal switch, there are three such flags. And diagonal switches go even crazier. Not to mention the fact that some of these flags are then shared with apparently totally unrelated setups, meaning that you cannot tell for sure what a certain flag is gonna produce. It may be a curve, it may be a switch, it may even be a furry creature from Alpha Centauri. The solution is to define each setup as precisely (i.e. with as many surrounding tiles and as few wild cards) as possible, to make sure the texture selection can be equally precise. Which is exactly the reason why the advanced rail INRUL file has decupled in size.
In short, RUL-2, even taking all the rotation and flip mechanisms into account, boils down to manual labor whereas INRULing reminds me more of solving math problems.
Cheers
Willy
More important to note by far is that Willy is the one and only person out there who really knows the rail flags! :thumbsup: It's rather like he's doing magic tricks than maths.
I've actually never encountered the furry creature...
Quote from: Swordmaster on October 21, 2013, 02:59:26 PM
I challenge you to learn rail INRULs. ;D Just to give you a teaser: road layouts use seven different flags: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, and 13. Rail layouts, on the other hand, use 0, 1, 2, 3, 11, 13, 21, 22, 23, 32, 42, 52, 62, and 72.
Let's see how much
I knowr...
INRULs are special overrides that affect a 5x5 area of network tiles, with the zeroth tile in the centre and the other 24 tiles (1 to 24) wrapping around the zeroth tile. It doesn't have to be 25 tiles, but it can be if you wanted it to. INRULs only work solely on one network, hence why INRULs are even named INRUL: Individual Network Rule.
There are actually two INRULs per network: One that defines the textures/paths/whatever assigned for each tile per specific set of flags (like 0,2,0,2 would be the orthogonal tile), the basic INRUL, and the other whose name is actually called "Supplementary Individual Network Rule". This is INRUL-14 for RHW, for example; in fact, all of the supplementary INRULs are even-numbered.
What makes them separate from RUL-2, for example, is that RUL-2 works one tile at a time, and because it works one tile at a time, it requires more code, but using both in conjunction (and especially with RUL-1) can be extremely powerful, and those are how the most complex Flex pieces are made.
When dealing with special overrides, we want the supplementary INRUL, but in both the basic and supplementary INRULs, 0 flags represents no connection, 1 and 3 flags are diagonal connections (diagonal left and diagonal right, as I call them), 2 flags are orthogonal connections, and 11 and 13 flags are ortho-diag blend connections (blend left and blend right, as I learnt them). 4 flags aren't used at all with any other network unless it's a 2-tile base network, like MHW or Avenue. These are used for the median, but the RHW, for example, can be forced to use "4" flags by writing a corresponding INRUL entry. "4" flags also make for excellent starters, but it makes setups with "4" flags impossible to draw with a single-tile network without having to write it in RUL-2 as a Flex piece or starter. I already know that Rail uses a bajillion more flags, but I don't know what they correspond to.
Also, RHW FlexRamps use a lot of "4" flags because they're slope-tolerant, and the Rail-based starters on the RHW FlexTransitions also use "4" flag. This is how it's possible for FlexRamps to be slope-tolerant (whereas the current DRIs and puzzle-based ramps will flatten bits of land) and how the FlexOST can even be placed on an extreme slope at all.
A bit of sample code from Github; this is part of the FlexHT, and in the Checktypes, it has a 4 flag.
[HighwayIntersectionInfo_0x00005334]
;Added by Tarkus 09.23.2012
;RHW FlexHT-L0-to-L2 Ortho
Piece = 0.0, 16.0, 0, 0, 0x5caee405
PreviewEffect = preview_flexhtrans_l2___000
CellLayout=....
CellLayout=..b<
CellLayout=..a.
CellLayout=..c.
CellLayout=..c.
CellLayout=..d.
CellLayout=..c.
CellLayout=..c.
CellLayout=..d.
CellLayout=..^.
CheckType = a - rail: 0x00000400 dirtroad: 0x02000200, 0xFFFFFFFF optional
CheckType = b - dirtroad: 0x00000000
CheckType = c - dirtroad: 0x02000200, 0xFF00FF00 optional
CheckType = d - rail: 0x00040404 dirtroad: 0x02000200, 0xFFFFFFFF optionalThe INRUL flags can be translated to a RUL-0/1/2 flag by adding a 0 (like 4 to 04) and transposing the positions of the flags (south-east-north-west for RUL-0/1/2, but something else for INRULs; I can't remember off the top of my head). The only INRUL flags that can be translated to RUL-0/1/2 are 0 to 4. This is how Flex pieces can be made based off of INRUL code and not just RUL-1 and RUL-2 code.
Well, that shows how much I know, because anything that's not 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 11, and 13 is just Greek to me. (But I already know half the Greek alphabet...) But with your teaser, you really did miss one Rail flag...
ANd as a side note, I've been thinking that the RHW should also have Minicurves, because even the MIS network bends are geometrically atrocious.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.johnlund.com%2FImages%2F81888416.jpg&hash=c57d7cc0ac638e52721b2703dbc7f22f45f1b80f)
Yay, NAM geekery ;D
Quote from: memo on October 21, 2013, 03:36:50 PM
More important to note by far is that Willy is the one and only person out there who really knows the rail flags! :thumbsup: It's rather like he's doing magic tricks than maths.
You're too flattering :) I'm sure Tropod had a fairly thorough understanding of the whole business.
Quote from: memo on October 21, 2013, 03:36:50 PM
I've actually never encountered the furry creature...
That's what the 42 flag is for ;D
For your reference Ganaram, these are the rail flags as I visualize them:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Finrul-rail-flags.jpg&hash=c077bd20accc91f473da92144aef91c2b06a3ce0)
These are mirrors of each other:
1 and 3
11 and 13
21 and 23
42 and 22
32 and 52
(And the INRUL flag order is W N E S -- exactly the opposite of RUL-0.)
I assume you're talking about the 4 flag that I missed out on. I deliberately did since like you described, it's only usable in puzzle pieces (as far as I know, at least).
Other than that, I wouldn't use the term overrides to describe INRULs. I see them as the basic building block that defines what your transit laying tools do (more
underrides than overrides as such). Absence of specific INRULs results in the cursor drawing red tiles saying "Unsuitable area to build network". But that's perspective, I assume.
Cheers
Willy
This is amazing work you're doing here! Beautiful to say the least, and the geometries are incredible. &apls
I always knew there was a huge amount of work put into this type of modding but never really understood how much. A huge thank you from me to you Willy and all others that do this type of thing for our game to get better and better everyday.
Great work Willy! This is going to be monumental and your name will echo in the Hall of the gods. (Not that your ego wasn't big enough already)
Robin :thumbsup: &apls
Quote from: Swordmaster on October 21, 2013, 02:59:26 PM
There's a problem with props this small in that their shadows not always show (at least not on my system).
I've ran into this problem before and I found that making the LOD at least 2.1 meters tall solved the shadow problem.
Can you tell me how many of the bumpers are needed for the mod? Is it just an 1 ortho and 1 diag.?
Ortho and diagonal for both dual and single track rail. I think Willy has also started work on FARR stubs, but he'd have to give you info about that.
We'd also need 18.5°, -18.5°, 26.5° and -26.5°. The negative rotations are necessary for the mirrored T21s.
Cheers
Willy
Posting to watch, though I do look forward to the release of this mod.
Quote from: Swordmaster on October 22, 2013, 12:49:05 PM
We'd also need 18.5°, -18.5°, 26.5° and -26.5°.
That makes me excited :thumbsup:
Quote from: Flatron on September 09, 2013, 02:35:29 PM
Well, I was not talking about four tracks on one tile, but about placing two 45° curves adjacent to each other in a way that makes it possible to run 2 double track lines parallel and directly next to each other. just like the 45° curves that are possible with the RHW.
Good news--
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-double45.jpg&hash=fb7567097ed1ed3ae1a3999c7d201146c5d9ce1d)
This is the regular 45 degree curve puzzle piece, twice. I've converted some of its tiles to overhangs. Technically this isn't even RRW modding: it also works for the regular wide curves should you prefer those.
Cheers
Willy
Amazing~! &apls
wunderbar :)
Aaah this is going to save so much tiles. My dual tracks main railway is going to be more beautiful that way!
Great
That's awesome Willy! I've been needing something like this for quite some time :)
but.. but... what exactly is a flag? %confuso %confuso
these (http://blog.worldofemotions.com/danilka/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/All_Flags_of_the_World_5024x3757.jpg?9d7bd4)?
It sounds more complicated than it is, Carlos. It is basically a set of identifiers the game places on the map by way of any transit tool you use. Which flags are placed is hardcoded in the EXE, but what we do with the flags is customizable through the RUL code.
Practically speaking, the flags are located on the borders between two tiles, making each tile identifiable by four flags. In the INRUL code, their orientation is listed as west, north, east, south. With "0" being the flag for no connection, and "2" for an orthogonal connection, this would identify the straight orthogonal tile as 0,2,0,2. The northward pointing orthogonal stub would be 0,0,0,2. The southward stub 0,2,0,0. (Note that the points of the compass are relative here, not related to map rotation.)
Visualize it like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Ftheseflagsdontwave.jpg&hash=2831607836b0df862a3318628ef0d889cceee2b2)
If you had INRUL files where these flags were the only one defined, then the above setup would be the only possible one; every other action with the network tool would give the red dragging footprint.
Let me take this opportunity to announce a design decision we took for recoded rail tool.
If you ever read this post (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15931.msg469599#msg469599), I mention that rails have two different flag sets for the 45° curves, whereas roads have only one. I have cut a Gordian knot and disabled on set, to make life easier on myself and everyone who is constantly being pestered by my questions (you know who you are ;)).
Observe the differences:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-dragging-dia2.jpg&hash=5ffb3ab996c308dd97e3e96ab70f0ebcb2a0ab49) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-dragging-dia1.jpg&hash=73340eb8c19707a94956d1e5bf5e4df0cafaeb80)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-dragging-ortho2.jpg&hash=6ca5c9691d801b46c2eda02dcdafc4ceceb2c8f0) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-dragging-ortho1.jpg&hash=5355c5c0c60187fb00b0bdaac410bc05461d3ae0)
If this doesn't say much, you'll notice it instantly once you use the rail tool again.
The consequences are that the conversion to RRW in your cities will be less than trivial. There will be quite a bunch of your curves and switches that if you click on them, they'll show red drag and they won't convert. You'll need to bulldoze them and redraw them. This is not a perfect solution, but it is a solution. Additionally, you may need some time adjusting to the tool, but in the long term it will be beneficial to the uniformity of the above mentioned network flags.
Most of all, this has saved me a great deal of coding so that I can actually work towards covering more setups instead of making sure I have every variation of every setup covered. (And these variations are, if you're following, exponential. Every curve next to a curve, switch next to a switch, switch next to a curve, wye next to a curve, etc. would require coding in two flag sets for every element.)
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on November 01, 2013, 07:21:32 AM
The consequences are that the conversion to RRW in your cities will be less than trivial. There will be quite a bunch of your curves and switches that if you click on them, they'll show red drag and they won't convert. You'll need to bulldoze them and redraw them. This is not a perfect solution, but it is a solution. Additionally, you may need some time adjusting to the tool, but in the long term it will be beneficial to the uniformity of the above mentioned network flags.
Most of all, this has saved me a great deal of coding so that I can actually work towards covering more setups instead of making sure I have every variation of every setup covered. (And these variations are, if you're following, exponential. Every curve next to a curve, switch next to a switch, switch next to a curve, wye next to a curve, etc. would require coding in two flag sets for every element.)
Makes total sense, Willy. Based on what I've read so far and doing a bit of math in my head, I wouldn't want to take on the duplicate flag scenario without an army of minion coders and a trained QA staff at my disposal. You are one guy, and you've got to draw a line at what you can and can not support. Only coding for one set of flags does cause a minor inconvenience, but the flip side of that is a more stable and reliable product with fewer chances for error. It's a reasonable decision.
Thanks, Wthrwyz. Don't get me wrong, INRULing is fun!
Meanwhile I'm spending some time on this. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fnwm-crossing.jpg&hash=72a666464fa37f47f3ca29ba5500ab357b21da08)
I have another version where the stopline doesn't extend into the turning lane. Still scouring Google maps for a decent example of this.
Automata engine courtesy of vester.
Cheers
Willy
Something like this? (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=los+angeles&hl=en&ll=34.002892,-118.078198&spn=0.001538,0.002064&sll=35.276281,-81.135879&sspn=0.008566,0.016512&t=k&gl=us&hnear=Los+Angeles,+Los+Angeles+County,+California&z=20)
Finding a few more in my local vicinity . . . [1] (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=231st+Ave+Hillsboro&hl=en&ll=45.530157,-122.914363&spn=0.001684,0.004128&sll=45.448224,-122.804918&sspn=0.003387,0.008256&t=k&gl=us&hnear=NW+231st+Ave,+Hillsboro,+Oregon+97124&z=19) [2] (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=231st+Ave+Hillsboro&hl=en&ll=45.5102,-122.851396&spn=0.001684,0.004128&sll=45.448224,-122.804918&sspn=0.003387,0.008256&t=k&gl=us&hnear=NW+231st+Ave,+Hillsboro,+Oregon+97124&z=19) [3] (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Tualatin,+OR&hl=en&ll=45.367839,-122.821551&spn=0.001688,0.004128&sll=45.505294,-122.841863&sspn=0.001684,0.004128&t=k&gl=us&hnear=Tualatin,+Washington,+Oregon&z=19)
It appears the stop line doesn't extend across the center lane at any of these crossings, just as in Kuewr's example. (And in #3, just to the north is the DMV where I got my driver's license.)
-Alex
Does it matter that it is double yellow before and after the crossings?
Quote from: H2Odk on November 03, 2013, 07:22:41 PM
Does it matter that it is double yellow before and after the crossings?
I'd be inclined to say no, for stability purposes, at least at present.
-Alex
Would crossing gate mods still work?
I think whether or not the stopline goes across the median/turn lanes depends on the nature of the turn lane. It seems that if it's a dedicated turn lane for one direction of traffic the line extends across it, but the line doesn't if it's an either-way 'suicide' turn lane (Tarkus' 2nd pic) or just a painted off median (Tarkus' 1st pic). In my town (my drug ridden, stinky, cancer-causing mill town) an hour north of Tarkus here's an example of case 1, (https://maps.google.com/?ll=46.116141,-122.949832&spn=0.000555,0.000603&t=h&z=21) and just down the street here's an example of case 2 (https://maps.google.com/?ll=46.128191,-122.971798&spn=0.000555,0.000603&t=h&z=21). The line appears dashed instead of solid because it's older and the heavy freight here wears hard on the road.
The first one looks like a high capacity turning lane than a turning lane median. In game terms, that would be an Avenue TULEP railroad crossing.
Fantastic work Willy!!
Robin
This is really great !! The new aspect of the railways is amazing and pretty realistic !!
I agree. It's a huge improvement over the Maxis rails (which I always thought were pretty good until I saw this project.)
Another variety (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=33.809075,-117.85569&spn=0.000999,0.001549&t=h&z=20) employs a concrete divider. However, this particular example was taken from a quiet-zone where train horns are no longer used. Four-quadrant gates and a divider (intended to prevent cars from trying to skirt around). The biggest thing to note is the crossing yellow stripe marking the end of the turning lane prior to the crossing.
-Matt
Close to perfection Willy!
The concrete dividers are provided on the crossing gate mod I use.
I would go with an "if traffic can approach the crossing in that lane, it gets a stop bar" approach. The real world seems to have a lot of variety on what lanes get bars and which don't anyway.
I love all the bits about the RUL flags too. In case you're interested, the Wiki desperately needs a knowledgeable person to expand upon the rail Network Flags. $%Grinno$%
this mod is GREAT! &apls :thumbsup: i hope they release the 4-lane rail track. :o
Quad track rail is not planned for this release...it's a long term plan...don't even know if it's gonna be released or not...there has been some work on TTR but due to some issues and Dedgren being not active lately the TTR is on hiatus...let's enjor the RRW for the moment :thumbsup:
Just a curiosity Willy...you've shown a picture of a 7.5m rail overpass at the beginning on my request...don't want to put any pressure as we're absolutely not in a rush and we just want to enjoy the game...is there some work going on thsat front for the first release or is it a long term plan?and speaking of elevated rail...are you planning to do something for elevated STR?i remember seeing pictures of elevated STR in the past but that project havs been on hiatus for a while now...
Thanks for your precious work and the amazing stuff you're preparing for us!
and thanks for your kindness when replying all the different questions... &apls
Cheers
Guglielmo
Quote from: Gugu3 on November 06, 2013, 02:24:41 AM
Quad track rail is not planned for this release...it's a long term plan...don't even know if it's gonna be released or not...there has been some work on TTR but due to some issues and Dedgren being not active lately the TTR is on hiatus...let's enjor the RRW for the moment :thumbsup:
Just a curiosity Willy...you've shown a picture of a 7.5m rail overpass at the beginning on my request...don't want to put any pressure as we're absolutely not in a rush and we just want to enjoy the game...is there some work going on thsat front for the first release or is it a long term plan?and speaking of elevated rail...are you planning to do something for elevated STR?i remember seeing pictures of elevated STR in the past but that project havs been on hiatus for a while now...
Thanks for your precious work and the amazing stuff you're preparing for us!
and thanks for your kindness when replying all the different questions... &apls
Cheers
Guglielmo
okay. :'(
Thanks for those ideas on the crossings everyone. I'm working on a potentially neat fix.
Quote from: whatevermind on November 04, 2013, 08:18:39 PM
I would go with an "if traffic can approach the crossing in that lane, it gets a stop bar" approach. The real world seems to have a lot of variety on what lanes get bars and which don't anyway.
I love all the bits about the RUL flags too. In case you're interested, the Wiki desperately needs a knowledgeable person to expand upon the rail Network Flags. $%Grinno$%
Yes, I have that planned for after the release. So that's still a really, really long way off.
Maybe. $%#Ninj2
Quote from: Gugu3 on November 06, 2013, 02:24:41 AMQuad track rail is not planned for this release...it's a long term plan...don't even know if it's gonna be released or not...there has been some work on TTR but due to some issues and Dedgren being not active lately the TTR is on hiatus...let's enjor the RRW for the moment :thumbsup:
Just a curiosity Willy...you've shown a picture of a 7.5m rail overpass at the beginning on my request...don't want to put any pressure as we're absolutely not in a rush and we just want to enjoy the game...is there some work going on thsat front for the first release or is it a long term plan?and speaking of elevated rail...are you planning to do something for elevated STR?i remember seeing pictures of elevated STR in the past but that project havs been on hiatus for a while now...
Thanks for your precious work and the amazing stuff you're preparing for us!
and thanks for your kindness when replying all the different questions... &apls
It's the other way round--my gratitude goes to all the people who've shown their support so far, especially my NAM team colleagues and my little private club of testers :thumbsup:
As for QTR, it is included in the IID scheme, so consider it "planned". I even made a quick orthogonal mockup to assess the potential geometrical hurdles. Same with TTR, on my part at least. David's material is sitting on my HD but there are other priorities now. My greatly increased comfort with overhanging networks has made both of these a real possibility, though.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fttr-preview.jpg&hash=a9c64324fb5bf933daa58b825ea349b03f99cf73) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fqtr_preview.jpg&hash=9ae07a545d5d4a14bda434ded258686751eab28b)
As for what you guys can most likely expect regarding the upcoming release, the next two or three NAMs will be "rollouts" for the RRW, so don't expect full functionality from the go. I've spent most of my time prepping the DTR network, which as of now involves the following tiles (probably a few more after today):
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fdtr-textures.jpg&hash=85d3204c66999143d214978aa66c9d021d5d48a6)
Spot the differences ;D
As these take up quite some time RULing, pathing and modeling, this'll be the core of what'll be in NAM 32 on my end. There's also testing and documentation to be kept in mind of course. Everything else is "bonus" at this point. As shown I'm working on crossings, but not every single one of them will be covered yet. There's also been a serious effort to convert STR to the minicurve specs, but likewise, there will be gaps (as there are in the current RAM-STR network). Of course, the existing WRC and FARR puzzle pieces have been retextured and repathed. But most certainly, don't hold your breath for any other features.
The reason for that is more than just time constraints: the secondary features (STR, draggable elevated networks, draggable FARR & switches and so on) will be built on top of the base DTR network. Therefore, I have deliberately postponed these items because I need the base network to be released and tested by all of you folks first. This is to avoid duplicate work--changes to the DTR network to fix bugs would potentially disrupt any other coded material--and it is known that despite the great effort put in by the team and associates, the first bug usually pops up a few minutes after release.
I have a rough schedule of things to come but as per usual policy there are no announcements or promises of this kind.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on November 06, 2013, 04:27:27 AM
Thanks for those ideas on the crossings everyone. I'm working on a potentially neat fix.
Quote from: whatevermind on November 04, 2013, 08:18:39 PM
I would go with an "if traffic can approach the crossing in that lane, it gets a stop bar" approach. The real world seems to have a lot of variety on what lanes get bars and which don't anyway.
I love all the bits about the RUL flags too. In case you're interested, the Wiki desperately needs a knowledgeable person to expand upon the rail Network Flags. $%Grinno$%
Yes, I have that planned for after the release. So that's still a really, really long way off.
Maybe. $%#Ninj2
Quote from: Gugu3 on November 06, 2013, 02:24:41 AMQuad track rail is not planned for this release...it's a long term plan...don't even know if it's gonna be released or not...there has been some work on TTR but due to some issues and Dedgren being not active lately the TTR is on hiatus...let's enjor the RRW for the moment :thumbsup:
Just a curiosity Willy...you've shown a picture of a 7.5m rail overpass at the beginning on my request...don't want to put any pressure as we're absolutely not in a rush and we just want to enjoy the game...is there some work going on thsat front for the first release or is it a long term plan?and speaking of elevated rail...are you planning to do something for elevated STR?i remember seeing pictures of elevated STR in the past but that project havs been on hiatus for a while now...
Thanks for your precious work and the amazing stuff you're preparing for us!
and thanks for your kindness when replying all the different questions... &apls
It's the other way round--my gratitude goes to all the people who've shown their support so far, especially my NAM team colleagues and my little private club of testers :thumbsup:
As for QTR, it is included in the IID scheme, so consider it "planned". I even made a quick orthogonal mockup to assess the potential geometrical hurdles. Same with TTR, on my part at least. David's material is sitting on my HD but there are other priorities now. My greatly increased comfort with overhanging networks has made both of these a real possibility, though.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fttr-preview.jpg&hash=a9c64324fb5bf933daa58b825ea349b03f99cf73) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fqtr_preview.jpg&hash=9ae07a545d5d4a14bda434ded258686751eab28b)
As for what you guys can most likely expect regarding the upcoming release, the next two or three NAMs will be "rollouts" for the RRW, so don't expect full functionality from the go. I've spent most of my time prepping the DTR network, which as of now involves the following tiles (probably a few more after today):
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fdtr-textures.jpg&hash=85d3204c66999143d214978aa66c9d021d5d48a6)
Spot the differences ;D
As these take up quite some time RULing, pathing and modeling, this'll be the core of what'll be in NAM 32 on my end. There's also testing and documentation to be kept in mind of course. Everything else is "bonus" at this point. As shown I'm working on crossings, but not every single one of them will be covered yet. There's also been a serious effort to convert STR to the minicurve specs, but likewise, there will be gaps (as there are in the current RAM-STR network). Of course, the existing WRC and FARR puzzle pieces have been retextured and repathed. But most certainly, don't hold your breath for any other features.
The reason for that is more than just time constraints: the secondary features (STR, draggable elevated networks, draggable FARR & switches and so on) will be built on top of the base DTR network. Therefore, I have deliberately postponed these items because I need the base network to be released and tested by all of you folks first. This is to avoid duplicate work--changes to the DTR network to fix bugs would potentially disrupt any other coded material--and it is known that despite the great effort put in by the team and associates, the first bug usually pops up a few minutes after release.
I have a rough schedule of things to come but as per usual policy there are no announcements or promises of this kind.
Cheers
Willy
nice mod! after RAM. the RealRailway replace the old Railroad Addon Mod! &apls
Excellent work Willy &apls I really appreciate the attention to detail--to the point that one needs a trained eye to play the "spot the differences" game :D
Quote from: noahclem on November 06, 2013, 04:52:07 AM
Excellent work Willy &apls I really appreciate the attention to detail--to the point that one needs a trained eye to play the "spot the differences" game :D
yep. the RealRailway is GREAT! &apls :thumbsup: &hlp
The RAM was a jump in realism and versatility. This is a jump of at least the same size. We jumped over SC2013....!
Quote from: FrankU on November 06, 2013, 05:42:05 AM
The RAM was a jump in realism and versatility. This is a jump of at least the same size. We jumped over SC2013....!
Over? I'd argue that SC2013 never surpassed us, especially with the amount of modifications that exist for SC4. The RRW is looking really great, Swordmaster, and even though I had my doubts about the colour scheme you picked, it has grown on me quite a bit and I really like it now.
Quote from: CasperVg on November 06, 2013, 05:45:53 AM
Quote from: FrankU on November 06, 2013, 05:42:05 AM
The RAM was a jump in realism and versatility. This is a jump of at least the same size. We jumped over SC2013....!
Over? I'd argue that SC2013 never surpassed us, especially with the amount of modifications that exist for SC4. The RRW is looking really great, Swordmaster, and even though I had my doubts about the colour scheme you picked, it has grown on me quite a bit and I really like it now.
yes. you are right. also. i read this on SC4D wiki: "There is not a game with the title SimCity 5 (SC5), although the name has been used for years to denote the potential sequel to SimCity 4." :thumbsup:
Quote from: CasperVg on November 06, 2013, 05:45:53 AM
Quote from: FrankU on November 06, 2013, 05:42:05 AM
The RAM was a jump in realism and versatility. This is a jump of at least the same size. We jumped over SC2013....!
Over? I'd argue that SC2013 never surpassed us, especially with the amount of modifications that exist for SC4.....
Yeah, indeed. After I sent the reply I realised that it was quite a stupid remark. Comparing SC2013 and SC4 is something like comparing pliers with a pig, or a box of tomatoes with ... I don't know. No real reference to compare them. Just not.
OK, let's cut the crap.
RRW RULs!
Quote from: FrankU on November 06, 2013, 06:47:04 AM
Quote from: CasperVg on November 06, 2013, 05:45:53 AM
Quote from: FrankU on November 06, 2013, 05:42:05 AM
The RAM was a jump in realism and versatility. This is a jump of at least the same size. We jumped over SC2013....!
Over? I'd argue that SC2013 never surpassed us, especially with the amount of modifications that exist for SC4.....
Yeah, indeed. After I sent the reply I realised that it was quite a stupid remark. Comparing SC2013 and SC4 is something like comparing pliers with a pig, or a box of tomatoes with ... I don't know. No real reference to compare them. Just not.
OK, let's cut the crap.
RRW RULs!
you see what i said: there's NO SC5. SC13 is just a reboot of the SimCity series. not a sequel of SC4. :thumbsup: NOTE: this is a RRW topic. not a SC13 topic.
This is amazing! Truly stunning and innovative work here. Great job!
Quote from: Vlasky on November 06, 2013, 08:50:44 AM
This is amazing! Truly stunning and innovative work here. Great job!
yep. RealRailway is amazing. :P
Quote from: FrankU on November 06, 2013, 06:47:04 AM
RRW RULs!
I see what you did there. ::) :D
It's getting boring but it can't be said enough: fantastic work Willy! &apls
Also, I'm really hoping elevated STR (be it pp or draggable) will become reality someday! :thumbsup:
Quote from: vortext on November 06, 2013, 09:35:10 AM
Quote from: FrankU on November 06, 2013, 06:47:04 AM
RRW RULs!
I see what you did there. ::) :D
It's getting boring but it can't be said enough: fantastic work Willy! &apls
Also, I'm really hoping elevated STR (be it pp or draggable) will become reality someday! :thumbsup:
we don't know when the next NAM to be release.
Meeston, do you have to reply on every single posts on the NAM board? This comes off as spamming...
Quote from: MandelSoft on November 06, 2013, 10:18:40 AM
Meeston, do you have to reply on every single posts on the NAM board? This comes off as spamming...
no. /wrrd%&
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweknowmemes.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F09%2Fepic-jackie-chan-template.png&hash=0aa6aa57247c7301282491d659cadfdce24f08a3)
Fine with me.
The current viaduct looked too historic for my preferences. I know this would require a lot of model creation, but concrete viaducts would fit better for modern or industrial railroads.
Quote from: Kuewr665 on November 06, 2013, 02:53:22 PM
Fine with me.
The current viaduct looked too historic for my preferences. I know this would require a lot of model creation, but concrete viaducts would fit better for modern or industrial railroads.
They already exist. Made by Rivit three years ago. They're available in the NAM installer I believe.
In case I'm wrong, here's a
link (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/24717-alternate-nam-rail-viaducts/)
I'll try using it. Thanks!
The last RAM piece is on the drawing board. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fdtr-str-transition-short.png&hash=715ab3a6754961ecfa23f963740586b82a500560)
Cheers
Willy
Could we have a piece where the track split into 2 separate STR bits,
Quote from: Swordmaster on November 07, 2013, 08:25:05 AM
The last RAM piece is on the drawing board. . .
I love it - great looking texture &apls
thanks for your time and explanation it makes a lot more sense know :thumbsup: I'll be looking forward to see those changes you promise, by the pictures I think I may know more or less what they are, but let's wait to prove them eheh =)
Regarding the new textures, once again, great job ! :thumbsup:
Like Agunter i'm interested in the idea of having a STR to 2STR puzzle piece...think many others are actually interested...probably you too Willy :D I'm just wondering if that is possible...think I've seen a piece like that somewhere on the RAM thread or maybe in 3RR posted by Dedgren...any ideas about it Willy?of course it is not a priority and might just be just an idea for future development...even though i think you've already taken such a puzzle piece into consideration ;)
Guglielmo
For those, I think modifying the existing crossover pieces so that the mainline tracks have bidirectional paths should be done to work properly.
I'm redoing my previously sloppy diagonal S curves. Who takes the bait? ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Fdiagonal-s-curve.jpg&hash=2993365e5ac23317717403a75288c6d786084436)
Winner gets a cookie. Or more probably, arctan (cookie/2).
Quote from: agunter999 on November 07, 2013, 11:32:24 AM
Could we have a piece where the track split into 2 separate STR bits,
Which track? STR track (that exists already) or DTR track? Following the RHW nomenclature, the former would be the STR A1 switch while the latter would be a DTR D1 switch.
Quote from: Gugu3 on November 07, 2013, 02:35:38 PMLike Agunter i'm interested in the idea of having a STR to 2STR puzzle piece...think many others are actually interested...probably you too Willy :D I'm just wondering if that is possible...think I've seen a piece like that somewhere on the RAM thread or maybe in 3RR posted by Dedgren...any ideas about it Willy?of course it is not a priority and might just be just an idea for future development...even though i think you've already taken such a puzzle piece into consideration ;)
Guglielmo
I think you meant DTR to 2x STR since the one you described already exists (see above). And it's definitely a necessary piece, though I've not thought of the design yet.
Cheers
Willy
8.25 ?
Apparently not $%Grinno$%
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Frect4222-7.jpg&hash=71bacc1a6e93e327a29bbb09802094f279f02573)
Cheers
Willy
11.490 m
WINNAR!!!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FNAM%2Frect4222-8.jpg&hash=36792cb0e13e0daf6bd734282a28830d7f884659)
Those pesky engineers. . . $%Grinno$%
Here's cookies:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fb%2Fb9%2FChocolate_Chip_Cookies_-_kimberlykv.jpg%2F320px-Chocolate_Chip_Cookies_-_kimberlykv.jpg&hash=58accdc7566943f8a5bbfb6f76ac046b3f094a40)
Cheers
Willy
Indeed I did approximation and it changes a lot, I think Arne is good.
I got 11.465 but with 3dsmax and not mathematically
Well, here's how you solve your problem:
a = 2.25
b = 1.75
c = (a² + b²)½ = (2.25² + 1.75²)½ = 2.85
½c = 2.85/2 = 1.425
D = 45°
B = arctan (1.75/2.25) = 37.9°
E = D + B = 45 + 37.9 = 82.9°
e = ½c / cos E = 1.425 / cos (82.9°) = 11.53
And that, my friends, it trigonometry for you ;)
Best,
Maarten
So the terms like STR and DTR are still used. I figured they would have newer terms as it is with roads.
Quote from: Kuewr665 on November 09, 2013, 11:39:04 AM
So the terms like STR and DTR are still used. I figured they would have newer terms as it is with roads.
I once proposed, in a draft manual of the RRW Manual, that the terms RRW-1 and RRW-2 be used, but I was torn between STR/DTR and RRW-1/RRW-2 over which is more familiar. I ended up using STR/DTR, but left RRW-1 and RRW-2 in parentheses.
As with Roads, MAVE never caught on well. I had the mindset of calling them MAVE-2 because of how the now-called RD-4 and RD-6 are called, but since so many people kept confusing them with AVEs by dropping off the M (and the fact that they rhyme*), the term "MAVE" was killed and replaced with "RD" for being more recognisable and easier to understand than "MAVE".
* - By the way, "NAM" rhymes with "mom", not "fan," or at least that's how I've been pronouncing it, and NWM is pronounced enn-wim. And RHW is are-aych-dub-bull-yew. MIS is pronounced miss, and STR is pronounced stir. Guess how "Ganaram Inukshuk" is pronounced.
Yeah, something like RRW-1 and RRW-2 was what I had in mind.
Gah-na-rahm Ee-nook-shook?
I think I'm more familiar with Tarkus' pronunciation and always thought that NAM rhymed with Ma'am. I never really thought about it as "nom". STR to me was always ess-tee-arr, since I didn't see any vowels or other indicators to how to say it.
From the manual:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fpr.jpg&hash=50eb2e80537c391acdd5689041e67c4a5c361eb9)
Cheers
Willy
You already doing the manual?that made me think you have enough material for the first release... $%Grinno$%
Guglielmo
Quote from: APSMS on November 09, 2013, 02:19:39 PM
I think I'm more familiar with Tarkus' pronunciation and always thought that NAM rhymed with Ma'am. I never really thought about it as "nom". STR to me was always ess-tee-arr, since I didn't see any vowels or other indicators to how to say it.
As of NAM, think Vietnam for a while and how different people pronounce it. As of STR, think of either the Arabic alphabet's near-complete lack of vowel symbols or TXT MSGing where the Latin alphabet is forced to become an abjad.
Quote from: Swordmaster on November 09, 2013, 02:35:10 PM
From the manual:
Is this gonna be where instead of saying "double three double six", I say "three three six six" and others say "thirty-three sixty-six?" Because I say "are are double-yew".
I doubt it's possible to establish an official pronunciation guide for the NAM or cases with only one official pronunciation because, 1, we're reading text and not hearing words so it's hard to know what it's supposed to sound like, and 2, regional pronunciation differences aplenty, and even personal differences, and it's hard to create a single agreeable pronunciation.
Tarkus (Alex) says AVE like the first syllable of Abraham (but with a V instead of a B), but Haljackey says it like the first syllable of Avenue. Alex says emm eye ess, I say miss. "Pee oh eee" (P0E) versus "pee zero eee" (oh-eee is already reserved as a nickname I use for a family member, and because of some pronunciation guidelines I picked up from 8th grade, I almost always refuse to say zeros as o's). Then you have the people who pronounce NAM as enn ay emm, NAM with the a from apple, NAM with the a from awful, NAM followed by "What's enn ay emm"... %confuso
Do we really care how it's pronounced?
Quote from: art128 on November 09, 2013, 03:00:46 PM
Do we really care how it's pronounced?
It shouldn't be the case, otherwise it'd be a whole 'nother can of worms to deal with, and even if it is, there's no way to limit to just one way to pronounce it.
Of course, dutch pronunciation will screw up everything! :D
- RHW: air-hah-way
- RRW: air-air-way
- NWM: ann-way-am
- STR: as-tay-air
- MIS: am-ee-as
- NAM: an-ah-am
(actually, all A's (ah's) will be pronounced as the double aa in my name).
Try to wrap your head around those...
Best,
Maarten
NAM: Nahm
RHW: Are-ach-double-u
RRW: Are-Are-double-u
NWM-Enn-double-u-emm
STR: Ess-Tee-Are
MIS: Miss
That's how I say them.
Quote from: Durfsurn on November 09, 2013, 04:27:37 PM
NAM: Nahm
RHW: Are-ach-double-u
RRW: Are-Are-double-u
NWM-Enn-double-u-emm
STR: Ess-Tee-Are
MIS: Miss
That's how I say them.
What I do as well. (The 'u's are really pronounced 'you'). Except NAM is
en-ay-em and MIS is
em-eye-ess. I usually pronounce the individual letters of all acronyms.
Not that this matters too much when our main form of communication is typed.
Same as Durfsurn, except I automaitcally seem to decompose RRW into Real Railway, but the rest I pronounce the acronyms
My style of pronouncing NAM abbreviations, Filipino style, with a hint of mathlish! $%Grinno$% :D
RHW = Ar-eyts-dobol-yu :D
RRW = Ar2-dobol-yu :P :D
NWM = En-dobol-yu-em ;D
STR = Es-ti-ar :D
MIS = Em-ay-es ;D
NAM = En-ey-em, or Naehm. :D $%Grinno$%
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on November 09, 2013, 03:03:45 PM
Quote from: art128 on November 09, 2013, 03:00:46 PM
Do we really care how it's pronounced?
It shouldn't be the case, otherwise it'd be a whole 'nother can of worms to deal with, and even if it is, there's no way to limit to just one way to pronounce it.
&dance &dance &dance Of course this is important and more importantly fascinating! :satisfied: :satisfied:
This thread needs less nerdiness, slightly more evil.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fevil-rrw.jpg&hash=c55f3ba61388dc3694c5f7fc304662b9b21e2360)
This actually means I'm more or less done with pathing.
Pathing mostly goes like this: ()testing()
Quote from: Gugu3 on November 09, 2013, 02:38:46 PM
You already doing the manual?that made me think you have enough material for the first release... $%Grinno$%
Guglielmo
There's actually been a draft manual since June. The existence of manuals, installers, or similar objects of interest doesn't necessarily mean anything. ;)
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on November 09, 2013, 02:55:26 PMIs this gonna be where instead of saying "double three double six", I say "three three six six" and others say "thirty-three sixty-six?" Because I say "are are double-yew".
It's mathematical simplification I guess. Personally, I pronounce RRW as "awesome rails".
Cheers
Willy
Looks great. Me so like that!!!
That look amazing :)
Quote from: Swordmaster on November 10, 2013, 05:09:51 AM
This thread needs less nerdiness, slightly more evil.
...pic...
This actually means I'm more or less done with pathing.
reminds me of an xkcd comic:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgs.xkcd.com%2Fcomics%2Fhighway_engineer_pranks.png&hash=75c7d0b48b64d6f49eb2e7c0bbcf4c74dba230e4)
now that's one of those rare cases where trignometry cames in hand :D (/sarcasm out) :D :D
First the spelling:
NAM: en-ey-em
RHW: er-ha-we
RRW: er-er-we
NWM: en-we-em
STR: es-te-er
MIS: em-i(english e)-es
BTT:
Nice work, I hope it will be released soon (maybe at a christmas-present?)
boy who knew there would be a triganomitry test!!!!!! :))
Quote from: gn_leugim on November 10, 2013, 02:03:38 PM
now that's one of those rare cases where trignometry cames in hand :D (/sarcasm out) :D :D
Nanh. AutoCAD did the trick for me ;D
now that I think, I give some lessons on math of school, I might get this as an example exercise :P
Quote from: vester on November 19, 2013, 04:08:39 PM
Quote from: gn_leugim on November 10, 2013, 02:03:38 PM
now that's one of those rare cases where trignometry cames in hand :D (/sarcasm out) :D :D
Nanh. AutoCAD did the trick for me ;D
that's cheating! XD
Well, I pronounce it that way:
NAM = Näm(one word)
RHW = Err-Ha-We
RRW = Err-Err-We
MIS = Mis(similar to Miss)
I love your textures, by the way :)
why not ear it?
http://translate.google.pt/#pt/en/Name.%0ARHW.%0ARRW.%0ANWM.%0ASTR.%0AMisse.%0ASame. :P
Quote from: Durfsurn on November 09, 2013, 04:27:37 PM
NAM: Nahm
RHW: Are-ach-double-u
RRW: Are-Are-double-u
NWM-Enn-double-u-emm
STR: Ess-Tee-Are
MIS: Miss
That's how I say them.
Mine are about the same, except I pronounce NWM "nawm" (compare the possible pronunciations of "pwn").
Okay, I get it folks. You keep chumming on with the pronunciation stuff just to draw me out eh?
You won. NAM train is bringing you a RRW bridge.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fm49sATQ.jpg&hash=7c9ff8e1af3e4e42ea8d0583724ca8d0846b38d3)
namtrain1.jpg
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9vE2kjv.jpg&hash=06d9225233f09dc1b04e8ec3cccb192b2b6c853c)
namtrain2.jpg
Cheers
Willy
Excellent work, Willy!
Sweet! Who do we thank for the modeling? It looks awesome. &apls
Thanks!
Quote from: Simcoug on November 21, 2013, 12:49:00 PM
Sweet! Who do we thank for the modeling? It looks awesome. &apls
Myself. ;D
There is no modelling--at least not in the sense you would see it. It's all S3D editing and took me the better part of the last two days. This being a Maxis bridge, I had to pull off some tricks since, like a lot of vanilla content, it was made quite "roughly" ::)
Cheers
Willy
Awesome as always Willy :)
Awesome work Willy! &apls
Blue train, eh?
Let's all hop on the NAM train. What a ride that will be :D
Pure distilled glorious, with no chaser.
-Matt
Nice work, Willy. :thumbsup:
Is no one else going to give Willy a K-point for two days of work on such an amazing conversion of the best maxis rail bridge? ::) I don't like the appearance of conflicts of interests regarding friends but this is just brilliant!
Quote from: noahclem on November 21, 2013, 02:33:23 PM
Is no one else going to give Willy a K-point
K-points from me for sure....
Quote from: vester on November 21, 2013, 02:46:10 PM
Quote from: noahclem on November 21, 2013, 02:33:23 PM
Is no one else going to give Willy a K-point
K-points from me for sure....
Glad you agree Arne! The deed is done ;)
Amazing job on the bridge! And that reminded me that a few months back I did snap a few pictures especially for you guys cuz I was thinking you gonna like them:
http://imgur.com/a/MGqhP/embed
Sorry I don't want to take up much space in your thread and I have no idea how to post album so that was the best possible thing I could do. Hope you like them.
That looks perfect for older railroads. I love it.
this is amazing &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Quote from: noahclem on November 21, 2013, 02:33:23 PM
Is no one else going to give Willy a K-point for two days of work on such an amazing conversion of the best maxis rail bridge? ::)
Just give us a bit of time, noah :P
Very nice job, Willy! :thumbsup: I didn't remember maxis' rail bridge was so... SD! :-X
Although, I think most steel rail bridges with that span (at least the ones I know) have no ballast at all. The slippers are directly set of the bridge structure which absorbs and dissipate the load of the train. Examples here (http://www.northernriversrailtrail.org.au/wp-content/galleries/rail-testgallery/33-leycester-creek-bridge-lismore-3.jpg), here (http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/aigarsr/aigarsr1203/aigarsr120300018/12801271-old-metal-railway-bridge-and-rails.jpg) or here (http://photos.wikimapia.org/p/00/02/31/43/38_full.jpeg).
PS: Vlad, my friend, you're link is showing a #404 error. What is the picture about?
PPS: By the way, I just love that train skin! The NAM
*has* to make that available! (hoping really hard :'( )
oh I am sorry. I tried to avoid posting big pictures since I don't know how to resize them but here it goes:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXhbW21Gh.jpg&hash=e1b3da4349133d88d521c66bd21c9966768f8a1a)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtacKI7Jh.jpg&hash=3b41feb5be2f0aef7263a227d4179fb800f39416)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FP1489sgh.jpg&hash=9f48e7d9c64a5e01353daa1643156aefb91f008e)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F8G6bLQph.jpg&hash=f56c1d4bab38c6a50ec7b2bfd66e4db9bd4a7522)
Thanks Serge for pointing that out!
Well, that is one nice looking bridge, even if it's standard Maxis.
@FlyHigh, I think the reason that the ballast is there is because Willy only did S3d editing, which would have probably caused issues trying to introduce transparency into the textures that are displayed under the bridge (if the under-bridge pieces even have textures to display).
Also, anyone know the purpose of the apparent guide rail that both bridges and tunnels/underpasses have? Is it really a guide rail? I'm curious as to the rationale behind it and since I have no idea what's it's called I'm not sure Google would help.
Quote from: APSMS on November 21, 2013, 05:06:56 PM
@FlyHigh, I think the reason that the ballast is there is because Willy only did S3d editing, which would have probably caused issues trying to introduce transparency into the textures that are displayed under the bridge (if the under-bridge pieces even have textures to display).
Yes, it seems to make sense!
Quote from: APSMS on November 21, 2013, 05:06:56 PMAlso, anyone know the purpose of the apparent guide rail that both bridges and tunnels/underpasses have?
The check rails (I think guide rails are also a possible name in english) that are common in bridges, tunnels and curve spans of railway are there to prevent derailment (to some degree) caused by horizontal movements due to track layout or by the natural horizontal oscillations caused by the cone-shape wheels. They can run parallel to both rails or used only to 'check' one of the rails (this last situations is used quite often when the layout is a tight curve).
Awesome work with the bridge! :thumbsup:
Thanks everyone!
Quote from: FlyHigh on November 21, 2013, 05:26:56 PM
Quote from: APSMS on November 21, 2013, 05:06:56 PM
@FlyHigh, I think the reason that the ballast is there is because Willy only did S3d editing, which would have probably caused issues trying to introduce transparency into the textures that are displayed under the bridge (if the under-bridge pieces even have textures to display).
Yes, it seems to make sense!
APSMS is right. It can't have transparent textures, so there has to be some kind of base. I made it dark enough to suggest it's not ballast but some kind of plating or wooden structure. Anything more elaborate than this isn't gonna play nice with zoomed out views either.
Here (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=49.895544,-97.130668&spn=0.000364,0.000915&t=k&z=21)'s the bridge I based the texture on, and it isn't transparent either.
@Vlasky: Thanks for those pictures. I hope the engineer never has to get off his engine on that bridge :D
Cheers
Willy
WOW, The bridge texture is so realistic, I love it !! Excellent job as always Willy &apls &apls
I missed this until just now.....I almost fell out of my chair. That has to be the best bridge ever!!!!
Fantastic work Willy!! Hope you can find time to do more.
Robin &apls &apls &apls
Nice work, Willy. This bridge will be just right for RRW. Everything looks so smooth! :thumbsup:
Quote from: Vlasky on November 21, 2013, 04:27:37 PM
oh I am sorry. I tried to avoid posting big pictures since I don't know how to resize them but here it goes:
There two ways of doing this.
One way is to open them in a editors. For resizing I use Irfanview (http://www.irfanview.com/). Open the images press [ctrl]+[R].
or by by adding
width= or
height= to the img tag:
[img width=600]http://i.imgur.com/XhbW21Gh.jpg[/img]
[img height=450]http://i.imgur.com/XhbW21Gh.jpg[/img](https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXhbW21Gh.jpg&hash=e1b3da4349133d88d521c66bd21c9966768f8a1a)
Great work on the bridges Willy. :thumbsup: Hope to see more...
So I have been coming back to the catenaries lately and have started work on the Mini-Curves. Here is the first set of right Mini-Curves. There will be more to come so watch this space.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMiniCurves_zps996483dd.jpg&hash=85161fb99c1218b840b22c8d0b44b0d0b8d3d524) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/MiniCurves_zps996483dd.jpg.html)
-eggman121
Great work as always. :thumbsup:
:thumbsup: the progress from the railway to the bridges to the cantenaries; its all very promising... :)
Seems like I've missed your post eggman!
The catenaries just look wonderful!sooo real!
Willy any progress so far?have you ever thought about making a "secret weapon" video for the RRW?
Cheers
Guglielmo
I missed it too. But hey, that are real fine beauties! Great developments here.
Will be there EL-RRW too? &apls
I think Moonlight's mod is all that will be done for a while, though eggman has shown interest in eventually porting the caternaries over to the EL-Rail network. I'd say it won't be for a while, esp. since all of his most recent work on curves is for the modified radius RRW ones, while the El-Rail retain the standard Maxis radii curvature (whole new set of T21 parameters for some of the trickiest parts of the network).
Because of the nature of the base network and the modding team responsible for GLR/ELR being mostly inactive, I'd suggest that reason as being the primary difference between the two potential projects; Heavy Rail is probably much simpler to mod.
Quote from: Gugu3 on December 12, 2013, 07:48:30 AM
Seems like I've missed your post eggman!
The catenaries just look wonderful!sooo real!
Willy any progress so far?have you ever thought about making a "secret weapon" video for the RRW?
Cheers
Guglielmo
Nothing to show Gugu, or you'd know ;)
Quote from: DJSun1981 on December 14, 2013, 04:01:07 AM
Will be there EL-RRW too? &apls
If you mean viaduct rail, then yes, but not yet. It'll be a draggable network but we're still prototyping. My model editing skills are improving rather quickly, so it's definitely a doable project.
Quote from: APSMS on December 14, 2013, 04:34:07 AM
I think Moonlight's mod is all that will be done for a while, though eggman has shown interest in eventually porting the caternaries over to the EL-Rail network. I'd say it won't be for a while, esp. since all of his most recent work on curves is for the modified radius RRW ones, while the El-Rail retain the standard Maxis radii curvature (whole new set of T21 parameters for some of the trickiest parts of the network).
Because of the nature of the base network and the modding team responsible for GLR/ELR being mostly inactive, I'd suggest that reason as being the primary difference between the two potential projects; Heavy Rail is probably much simpler to mod.
El-Rail or moonlinght's mod has of course nothing to do with RRW (I've been advocating to rename the thing ELR or E-Lightrail), but I assume DJSun1981 meant elevated heavy rail viaducts. As for light rail (E or G), there are plans being thrown around with an eye towards revamping the network; Noah, memo and myself have had this in mind at various points. From what I can tell, light rail uses the same INRUL flags as heavy rail, so there's a potential to port the RRW code into any such light rail revamp that may occur. It certainly has nothing to do with the present modding team or difficulty levels (in my opinion the most capable NAM team members are currently active--as you may recall one of them just created a brand new ELR over avenue network ;)).
Cheers
Willy
:o How long will we have been waiting for all these wonderful gems?
I meant, when will it be available to download?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMiniCurves_zps996483dd.jpg&hash=85161fb99c1218b840b22c8d0b44b0d0b8d3d524)
Quote from: Swordmaster on December 14, 2013, 05:42:32 AM
(I've been advocating to rename the thing ELR or E-Lightrail)
This is a good idea. :thumbsup: GLR could be referred to as GLR (or L0 LR-2), standard Rail could be GHDTR (or L0 HR-2), STR could be GHSTR (or L0 HR-1), El-Rail could be ELR (or L2 LR-2), and so on, in a nod to the RHW nomenclature. The sidings and the like that branch off could be named similarly to the RHW ramps. Just an idea. :)
On standard Maxis rail i never saw a sort of "in good place" signals, but in this RRW mod there are signals that are in the spots they should be or it remain another mod?
Quote from: jeckyll on December 14, 2013, 10:09:29 AM
:o How long will we have been waiting for all these wonderful gems?
I meant, when will it be available to download?
The RRW will be packaged with the next NAM release. You know how release dates work for that. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Flaviolovesimcity4 on December 14, 2013, 01:26:02 PM
On standard Maxis rail i never saw a sort of "in good place" signals, but in this RRW mod there are signals that are in the spots they should be or it remain another mod?
Willy has T21'd signals on all track switches, so yes, they will be more realistic.
Quote from: metarvo on December 14, 2013, 12:49:46 PM
This is a good idea. :thumbsup: GLR could be referred to as GLR (or L0 LR-2), standard Rail could be GHDTR (or L0 HR-2), STR could be GHSTR (or L0 HR-1), El-Rail could be ELR (or L2 LR-2), and so on, in a nod to the RHW nomenclature. The sidings and the like that branch off could be named similarly to the RHW ramps. Just an idea. :)
I wouldn't extend the idea to Heavy Rail, since the STR-DTR-TTR-QTR nomenclature is already quite familiar to most people. The difference between L2-DTR and ELR should be clear enough I think.
The switches are indeed already following the RHW scheme. Current "DTR-DTR parallel switch" would be an A2 for instance. Some further thinking needs to be done, though.
Quote from: Indiana Joe on December 14, 2013, 02:36:20 PMWilly has T21'd signals on all track switches, so yes, they will be more realistic.
Eh, I have not. I assume these would be an optional and customizable feature, but I haven't really thought about it yet. I know there are several signal prop packs available; I need to take a look at those.
Cheers
Willy
Thanks for the reply Willy and the effort you're putting into this project &apls &apls
Really? I often run into problems when describing elevated rail when they mean viaduct rail instead. The network called Elevated rail is actually Light rail.
Quote from: Swordmaster on December 15, 2013, 12:57:34 AM
Quote from: Indiana Joe on December 14, 2013, 02:36:20 PMWilly has T21'd signals on all track switches, so yes, they will be more realistic.
Eh, I have not. I assume these would be an optional and customizable feature, but I haven't really thought about it yet. I know there are several signal prop packs available; I need to take a look at those.
I was thinking of switch signals that you put on all the puzzle pieces. But you're right, I forgot they don't appear on draggables.
Quote from: jeckyll on December 14, 2013, 10:09:29 AM
:o How long will we have been waiting for all these wonderful gems?
I meant, when will it be available to download?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMiniCurves_zps996483dd.jpg&hash=85161fb99c1218b840b22c8d0b44b0d0b8d3d524)
If you are wondering when the overhead wire will be released my answer is not for a long time. There is a lot of work involved in making the wires and especially the poles and curves need multiple duplicate models to line up correctly ???. Switches will be even more troublesome since multiple models will be required. I also have the problem of railway crossings and signals that will need to be added to the mod so they can both show up instead of overwriting each other. I will have to work with other T21 modders and lot modders in general (for stations and such). I also have a fair bit of RL to contend with too such as starting a town planning course next year.
That being said I will continue to work on the wires where time permits. There is a lot of work that needs to be done so unfortunately wires won't be realized for quite a while.
-eggman121
Take your time eggman!your work is amazing &apls
I can live without wires! No problem.
Thanks @swordmaster, that answer my question
If i am right, it could be possible to make double-deck RRW - bridges with rail on the ground and above the rail a RHW ()what() like the DDRHW
Quote from: DJSun1981 on December 16, 2013, 09:22:20 PMIf i am right, it could be possible to make double-deck RRW - bridges with rail on the ground and above the rail a RHW like the DDRHW
Viaduct Rail has already existed for years, but it's been called, for the longest time, "Railroad Puzzle Pieces".
As of any form of RHW Dual Networking, as this kind of thing falls under that category, it won't be added due to the enormous number of crosslinkages it would need (as would be the number of people requesting for it if even one related feature is added).
Think he was not referring about viaduct rail Ganaram...think he was proposing something like el-rail over road/avenue but with heavy rail on ground and RHW on top...
Not feasible...cannot imagine the amount of crosslinking there :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
It's relatively possible, but not practical. I doubt it would be made, especially considering the space that would be needed to separate the two networks.
At first glance, I didn't like the texture at all. &mmm
But now I think this mod is a necessary addition to the NAM, especially with the wired catenaries from Eggman121 &hlp
Thanks for the support everybody :thumbsup:
I hope that Willy does not mind what I am posting here. I could not resist ;D. I have been working on wires for the Elevated Rail. Since there is no Height Restrictions on the Elevated Rail as far as I know I have been using the poles that uki sim has sent me as part of the catenaries mod that I am working on at the moment. Hopefully I make a few Japanese train fans happy :thumbsup:. Many credits to the original creator of these poles which is USO800鉄道BLOG. They are some fine structures. I will restrict the poles uki sim modified and wires to elevated structures since the I'm trying to keep the height of the L0 track structures under 7 to 6.5 m so they can pass under L1 Bridges. Hope you enjoy!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FElevated1_zpsc76cb998.jpg&hash=ed328f79d5d0862b3450a60a0750a23c0f036cf9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Elevated1_zpsc76cb998.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FElevated2_zps5c44d654.jpg&hash=f594dcedf8f71d6d50e85ebfe94bb3af3003d3e8) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Elevated2_zps5c44d654.jpg.html)
-eggman121
:o :o
It's a good addition :thumbsup:, but don't you think that in the future there are L3 network (ie RHW) over the elevated rail? &mmm
It's a good rule to standardize a project. ;)
Awesome! Interesting comparison; your poles are quite well scaled I think. It's maybe a pity in this view the wire overlaps exactly the outer rail. Not sure it can or needs to be fixed though.
@vinlabsc3k: it's very unlikely there will be crosslinks of L3 RHW over L2 RRW. That sounds really unnecessary to me, especially since there will be L1 RRW. Hence, L2 RHW over L1 RRW is much more likely. I'm not even sure to what level L2 RRW should be brought. That'll need some thinking
Cheers
Willy
In the end it's the same problem, ??? but I was not referring only to the overlap of the networks, but also to a more homogeneous appearance of the catenaries. :-[
I prefer the old style for the catenaries, it's more "neutral", so if someone wants a specific style, it requires after the release, but this is only my opinion. /&HiPP/%
Good job on the catenaries eggman &apls
Eggman, you are under arrest by the Walrus for murdering the default Rail textures and killing us all due to epicness overload... $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$%
Wow this is indeed something all of us detail seekers are wishing for. And it looks of course stunning. The catenaries themselves looked great, but this is just getting to perfection.
But does this mod work? Of course the straight lines are not problematic, but what about slopes and curves? There were issues with those as I am aware, are those issue overcome now?
Both styles of centenaries look excellent and so much nicer with the wires &apls &apls I'm actually not sure which I like more. I'm also curious about the slope functionality, particularly with diagonals.
Thanks for the comments guys :thumbsup: I am surprised by the results myself.
Quote from: Swordmaster on December 19, 2013, 05:43:54 AM
Awesome! Interesting comparison; your poles are quite well scaled I think. It's maybe a pity in this view the wire overlaps exactly the outer rail. Not sure it can or needs to be fixed though.
I think you mean the parapet or the outer railing on the bridge if I'm not mistaken. Please correct me if I am wrong. But I don't see the problem yet. ???
Quote from: strucka on December 19, 2013, 09:18:53 AM
Wow this is indeed something all of us detail seekers are wishing for. And it looks of course stunning. The catenaries themselves looked great, but this is just getting to perfection.
But does this mod work? Of course the straight lines are not problematic, but what about slopes and curves? There were issues with those as I am aware, are those issue overcome now?
Quote from: noahclem on December 19, 2013, 10:15:51 AM
Both styles of centenaries look excellent and so much nicer with the wires &apls &apls I'm actually not sure which I like more. I'm also curious about the slope functionality, particularly with diagonals.
Slope functionality as been part of the wires from the get go. You can see my prototype on page 3 of this thread with the wires slope conforming. I will show it again now.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSlopeConformityOrthogonal_zpscf258a6d.jpg&hash=98a1ecab3297be6c1b8ab5cc9a86d6ffaadae77d) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/SlopeConformityOrthogonal_zpscf258a6d.jpg.html)
Orthogonal(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSlopeConformityDiagonal_zps76f460bb.jpg&hash=7a1218fd1fe4c115401f69faf6b2705a88fac8bd) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/SlopeConformityDiagonal_zps76f460bb.jpg.html)
DiagonalAs for curves I have finished the Mini Curves for DTR and only the curves. Not the turnouts. I have set things up so when I make the right curve I can also obtain the left curve wires with minimal effort.
I understand that users may want different poles so I am creating different poles for different tastes but I will only make
one set of wires so the poles must conform to the height restrictions set by the wires. A bit odd but wires will probably run into thousands of different props.
Hope this has answered some questions.
-eggman121
Both look great, though I like my consistency. Nice job!
Only one set of wires? Does that mean the L2 top wires would still be higher than others?
Sorry to double post but I think it will be worth it.
Quote from: Kuewr665 on December 19, 2013, 02:27:31 PM
Both look great, though I like my consistency. Nice job!
Only one set of wires? Does that mean the L2 top wires would still be higher than others?
Hello Kuewr665. I will probably make two types of wires for L2 since there is more height liberty and less props to make. It will only occur on the L2 Viaducts. the rest of the wires will be standardized to a single set.
-
BATing your own PolesHere is the comparison between What I call
Type A poles and
Type B Poles. If any BATer would like to make there own poles than here are the dimensions of the L0 poles I am making. I know that there is a wide variety of poles around the world and that there may be requests for other style of poles so instead of trying to gather information and BATing the poles I will open up to the community and ask that if there is a style of pole that you want that you at least attempt to BAT it.
Here are the rulesAll poles must be centered on the
Y axis relative to the wire holder and the
wire holder must be centered on the
X axis if it a single pole or the the center of the entire pole if it is a pole with two wire holders for DTR track or a dual pole/ gantry.
Here is an image of what I mean...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTypeAPoles_zps309b03ae.jpg&hash=9c1c8717687fe14e3669a7a7ed8b0bc0abe00d20) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/TypeAPoles_zps309b03ae.jpg.html)
As you can see the Type A poles have a total height of
7.0 m and Type B poles have a total Height of
6.5 m The wires will be standardized to a bottom wire height of
5.75 m to give some liberty to train BATers as requested by Vester.
If you do decide to make poles I only need the orthogonal poles if you plan to send me them in gmax format. I can make the rest of the poles from there.
Hope to see what other types of poles are out there.
-eggman121
Great job eggman!this project is becoming more and more interesting &apls &apls &apls
The RRW is now available in the first NAM 32 Pre-Release.
-Alex
Thank you Alex. :party:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Frrw-install.jpg&hash=feb764f02c697ef7b5a5a37223dc9419877e987c)
To install the RRW versions of the WRC and FARR pieces, you also need to select those options. Same goes with Single Track Rail (STR).
As a reminder, you need to redraw (click or drag on) existing rail networks to make the conversion.
I don't recall if I mentioned this here already: Viaduct rail is supported to a limited extent (on-slope pieces, overpasses, ortho, dia, OxO and WRC pieces). The narrow curves and switches would need new models; yet viaduct rail will be revamped in the future so consider the current setup as a temporary placeholder to integrate the viaducts with your ground-level RRW.
As stated before this is only an initial release. It won't blow up your cities, but bugs may prevail. We encourage everyone to post any and all bugs they find in the Pre-release support topic (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=16279.msg474656#msg474656). :thumbsup:
Cheers
Willy
Eggman,
I am creating some railway signals that will conform to your standards. I wondered if you had the exact distance for the question mark in the image below. Thanks in advance!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrQ4TzZDs.jpg&hash=793deac2600bb4e8d8112c4d6be4b5a5f6a96c41) (http://i.imgur.com/rQ4TzZD.jpg)
Quote from: droric on December 20, 2013, 01:20:37 PM
Eggman,
I am creating some railway signals that will conform to your standards. I wondered if you had the exact distance for the question mark in the image below. Thanks in advance!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrQ4TzZDs.jpg&hash=793deac2600bb4e8d8112c4d6be4b5a5f6a96c41) (http://i.imgur.com/rQ4TzZD.jpg)
To answer you question the distance is 2.5 m. I did not include that dimension initially since It can vary. Maybe a bit close But poles are the easier parts to make so I can modify them if needed as opposed to wires.
To ask another question. If you are making railway signals are you planning to place them on a transit enabled lot or are you going to t21 them onto switches? If you are going the transport enabled lot version I will be making some props soon for stations and TE Lots and I will make them available to you. If you are going to t21 them we will have to work together since the t21s will conflict with each other. Same goes for level crossing cross-bucks and other related T21 props.
-eggman121
I have another question for you. I would like to make another set of models, but where do you use Type A and where do you use Type B?
Quote from: eggman121 on December 20, 2013, 02:01:19 PM
To answer you question the distance is 2.5 m. I did not include that dimension initially since It can vary. Maybe a bit close But poles are the easier parts to make so I can modify them if needed as opposed to wires.
To ask another question. If you are making railway signals are you planning to place them on a transit enabled lot or are you going to t21 them onto switches? If you are going the transport enabled lot version I will be making some props soon for stations and TE Lots and I will make them available to you. If you are going to t21 them we will have to work together since the t21s will conflict with each other. Same goes for level crossing cross-bucks and other related T21 props.
-eggman121
My original idea was to simply have an offset lot with the signals overhead. I am thinking of making an end piece for 1 track then a 2 track extender, 3 track etc. The end piece would go on one end of the rails and the other 2, 3, 4 or more rail piece would go on the other to complete the tower. Here is a quick screenie of what I currently have. If you have any suggestions I am more than open to them as I am not very familiar with T21s yet and how they can be used, spaced etc.
The pic is a WIP I started this morning so it doesn't have the lights or any texturing yet (Just a vraydirt map). The picture would be of the 1 track half piece. The framing is pretty close to completed but I might make adjustments once I start exporting and checking in game. It's so hard to tell which details will be visible in game because of the alpha blending. When I BAT i almost always use transparency on the model because the alpha mask is blended against the background and gives a better appearance.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FfcLke4r.png&hash=4a763309f427dab14c9f038ebc8e9676e0fecd03)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FAGdqxaF.png&hash=9bdee012df847ffbf6e1b0452c632f08b702ae94)
Update: Added a clay render of the model with a symmetry modifier. Most of the modeling is finished on it.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbosNRCAs.jpg&hash=151b934ebe1d1f85459f88349eec00edc6d76fdd) (http://i.imgur.com/bosNRCA.png)
Hello MandelSoft
To answer your question the top wire or messenger wire has a top height of 7.0 m and a sagging height of 6.5m as shown below...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWiresDimentions_zps0f2befe2.jpg&hash=0f78c8b1e8661248b92670fc34f308ba00f16e1c) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WiresDimentions_zps0f2befe2.jpg.html)
The purpose of the Type A and Type B wires is to fit these heights of the wire since some sections of track may be needed to have shorter poles such as track ends. There will also be sections with only Type B poles where the spacing is only 16 m between poles so I can pass the wire under L1 bridges this will be achieved by making the T21 conform to wealth and lot conditions through zone and wealth mapping. I will show a picture of what I mean when I make the wires.
Also curves such as mini-curves only have type b wires depending where the wires are placed.
The Type B wires as I will call them for orthogonal and Diagonals will have no sagging with a consistent height of 6.5 m for ease of BATing and will be suited to Type B poles.
I hope that explains everything.
Quote from: droric on December 20, 2013, 03:13:41 PM
My original idea was to simply have an offset lot with the signals overhead. I am thinking of making an end piece for 1 track then a 2 track extender, 3 track etc. The end piece would go on one end of the rails and the other 2, 3, 4 or more rail piece would go on the other to complete the tower. Here is a quick screenie of what I currently have. If you have any suggestions I am more than open to them as I am not very familiar with T21s yet and how they can be used, spaced etc.
The pic is a WIP I started this morning so it doesn't have the lights or any texturing yet (Just a vraydirt map). The picture would be of the 1 track half piece. The framing is pretty close to completed but I might make adjustments once I start exporting and checking in game. It's so hard to tell which details will be visible in game because of the alpha blending. When I BAT i almost always use transparency on the model because the alpha mask is blended against the background and gives a better appearance.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FfcLke4r.png&hash=4a763309f427dab14c9f038ebc8e9676e0fecd03)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FAGdqxaF.png&hash=9bdee012df847ffbf6e1b0452c632f08b702ae94)
Hello droric
You should not have a problem if you are just going to offset the signals on a separate lot. I still need to finalize the details but I am going to making a set of Type B Wires which will be unhidden when a civic plopped high wealth zone mapping. This is going to be so the wires will be flush with the transport enabled stations. So to keep the normal wires just use LEprop editor to change the wealth of you lot. I'm sure that you have used that tool before ;) Nice signals BTW :thumbsup:. I think you have the correct method since the T21s can only be placed on the exact network tile.
-eggman121
Most of the railway towers around me are pretty weathered so I used a pretty rusted metal texture for the framing. I don't know if this is a little much though. It does seems to fit in pretty well though with the ballast colors though. Props seem to come out much better when rendered using VRay without an AA filter kinda how the old scanline renderer used to work. I have yet to see textures that don't line up using BAT4MAX6 (WIP).
I do notice a problem with high wealth though it seems to be overriding the base texture of the railway. The lot is current an elementary school with high wealth if that makes any difference.
I think it needs to be a tad darker. Right now it comes of more pink than rusty. Beautiful model work though!
If there's Diesel traffic especially, that frame will be much darker. It looks good, but may be overkill for a Single-Track line. They have a tendency to use standard poles.
@droric
I have not had a chance to look at your signal since I have been at work. I will review your signals and make any adjustments as soon as I have the time.
Keep up the good work.
Here is some content that I have been working on while I have had free time...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FEnd02_zps0cbcb12c.jpg&hash=e0ab09c3915453fb8cfbaab2c6086c301ac87ffe) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/End02_zps0cbcb12c.jpg.html)
End of the Line
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FOxOCrossing_zps8a9d6447.jpg&hash=7934c60aea3b2f5db1ef2edf489a71c21426446f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/OxOCrossing_zps8a9d6447.jpg.html)
OxO Crossing
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FOxDCrossing_zps58c81eb3.jpg&hash=ba15569ba316614f32ebc2a933ecb9e80cf4898b) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/OxDCrossing_zps58c81eb3.jpg.html)
OxD Crossing Still working on it though since I think the Orthogonal pole is a bit close to the track
enjoy!
-eggman121
Loving the End of line piece, this has been missing from every overhead line mods.
OK, here I have some catenary models ready in 3DS format. You do have to assign textures to it yourself, but I don't think that would be much of a problem. ;)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8Tb6LVuRM4QQ3hHXzB6X3oycDQ/edit?usp=sharing
Best,
Maarten
Mark, that's a great start. Whether or not it makes sense on an STR line is hard to say for me, but DTR (and wider) variants will look really good. I also agree with the lot-based approach. T21'ing signals will reduce the user's ability to control placement and will complicate the catenary work. As for the texture wealthing, I want to take a look at the whole railway sidewalk thing and see what options we can ship to the user (no sidewalk option, grass-based sidewalk option, etc.), which will fix that problem.
&apls for Stephen. Those crossings and stubs are phenomenal!
Cheers
Willy
Well done eggman!love the end poles! &apls
Beautiful work. I'm in awe.
David
Wow! I am loving those end models.
:o Fantastic work, those crossings are phenomenal! :thumbsup: &apls
Impressive work folks, well done &dance
Quick update: I used a park with neutral building lot with high wealth and I don't seem to have any of the issues with the rail tile wealth. I plan on having 4 pieces in total STR, DTR, DTR+STR, DTR+DTR. I can make more if theres demand. So two 1 tile overhang variants and 2 more 2 tile variants. I decided against having the split pieces since the ground would have to be completely flat for it to line up.
I made a few texturing changes to darken the metal color a bit although not black I think this might be a good compromise. I also changed the textures a bit on the ladder (safety reasons! too rusty) and top rails to make them a bit more visible and added shell modifiers to pretty much everything for increased visibility.
I will start on making some additional single sided railway signals as well today as originally suggested by Swordmaster in another thread.
Here are the pieces as they stand right now. Time to start on the other signals :)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYjKMfaPs.jpg&hash=6a2d87937068b8871d8753c7bd8aa279282df297) (http://i.imgur.com/YjKMfaP.jpg)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FthHcE7zs.jpg&hash=e47b9818f61ef4c4c9b751e251adf4f66f73a2b5) (http://i.imgur.com/thHcE7z.jpg)
:o Incredible work on the catenaries! And those signals are looking much better, too.
Damn eggman, that's all looking mighty fine. Keep up the good work. :thumbsup:
Thank you so much for the support everybody ;D. I really astounded by the interest in this mod!
And well done Droric! those signal are really good. Keep up the good work :thumbsup:
So today after work I have been playing around with wealth mapping and have yielded some great results. So if you place a high wealth plop Lot next to the track you get the B catenaries and Poles as shown...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWealthFlat_zps7e4d8958.jpg&hash=16b1066200eda58ca7c7f7fb8bcd24e6bde63775) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WealthFlat_zps7e4d8958.jpg.html)
The spacing is only 16 m and runs flush with the sagging ends of the A wire. You will have to place two lots together to make the wires run flush with both ends of the A wire or else there is a height discrepancy. Did I also say they slope conform...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWealthSlope_zps9773d529.jpg&hash=d508d1bacc08b353e1fec9b8422c7a4dceb596d3) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WealthSlope_zps9773d529.jpg.html)
Now if you use a Medium wealth Lot next to the track you get another variety of poles. For instance I have used Cogeo's rural stations which are medium wealth to get the next set of poles which can be used for stations. They are set back from the platform edge and also have foundations so they can function as normal gantry poles if needed.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStation1_zpsc6d68f7e.jpg&hash=0725b25d430554a83003f288f8542eec6723cbf9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Station1_zpsc6d68f7e.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStation2_zps00bd15c1.jpg&hash=a88dbe7f7aeeff41ae7d7639ee7e5f83f459f41e) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Station2_zps00bd15c1.jpg.html)
Now for the record I have not modified Cogeo's Stations in any way shape or form. The wires are purely presented by placing lots next to the track. If you don't want to have any wires being uncovered by your lots such as having fencing lots, the wealth should be set to Low or No wealth. The T21's can be quite flexible but do have there limitations.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWealthMedium_zpsa2dd567f.jpg&hash=fba5a25e767ba8cbef07cdb569964c1af6964611) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WealthMedium_zpsa2dd567f.jpg.html)
enjoy!
-eggman121
awesome work both of you! &apls loving it!
Such attention to detail! I love it.
Great idea!
Well done eggman and Droric! &apls
Great work guys :)
Hi, I posted some problems with the elevated pieces on the NAM forum... are those fixed yet? will you be posting an update with the fixes or will we have to wait until the pre release 2?
Oh my. These are very sexy (insofar as catenaries can be :p).
How are you going to deal with the issue of transit-enabled lots?
Will you be providing a guide as to how to use these catenaries on lots properly for a seamless appearance?
Can't wait to try these catenaries, it's something that's always been missing from SC4... Until now.
Quote from: cmdp123789 on December 22, 2013, 06:28:06 PM
Hi, I posted some problems with the elevated pieces on the NAM forum... are those fixed yet? will you be posting an update with the fixes or will we have to wait until the pre release 2?
Quote from: cmdp123789 on December 20, 2013, 01:30:55 PM
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1085.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj424%2Fcmdp123789%2F1_zps5e94a6dd.png&hash=d571090299d87ca8c51ded8665f9adc4f15ba053)
See in pic 1... the textures are blurry... so as in the avenue textures...
I don't know exactly what's going on here. Do you have a texture mod installed? It seems your Viaduct textures are overriden by another file.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Wiimeiser on June 15, 2013, 03:16:51 PM
Here's hoping PEG updates now (3+ lots)
I didn't forget you.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fpeg_rrw.jpg&hash=e3ef6f7397d4760e7043a0e8b5eb62fd2b5e41ca)
Now I need to find that third lot.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on December 23, 2013, 02:32:35 AM
I don't know exactly what's going on here. Do you have a texture mod installed? It seems your Viaduct textures are overriden by another file.
That's from Rivit's Excellent-but-very-soon-to-be-obsolete Rail Upgrade Mod.
As far as I know, I don't... The only thing selected was the brown viaduct... I will try to install again and make sure I don't... Question though... Where could the error be? I mean, is it possible that an option on the nam installer causes this?
I've made pretty sure that the NAM installer cannot be a problem, so I'm talking about outside mods like the RUM epicblunder mentioned. The NAM viaduct color options don't matter, since they don't include a rail texture (but Rivit's alternate Viaduct colors (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/24717-alternate-nam-rail-viaducts/) do). So if you only have a NAM installation, a reinstall may be a good idea to try.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on December 22, 2013, 11:10:09 PM
Oh my. These are very sexy (insofar as catenaries can be :p).
How are you going to deal with the issue of transit-enabled lots?
Will you be providing a guide as to how to use these catenaries on lots properly for a seamless appearance?
Can't wait to try these catenaries, it's something that's always been missing from SC4... Until now.
Hello Daniel
To answer your question TE lots will uncover the Type B Wires and series of poles. Since the Type B wires are uniform they will run flush with the wires from the TE Lots. I will make a tutorial for adding wires to TE Lots when the time comes. I will make a series of wires for use on TE lots since Orthogonal Wires are not hard to make but the ends of the TE Lot must have ending B Type wires or wires that are only 6.5 m tall for the top wire to run flush with the T21 Type B wires.
Here is an image of what I mean...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTELot1_zps7c475ef4.jpg&hash=27a125ceae4a03f4b06593548b062d0a80287358) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/TELot1_zps7c475ef4.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTELot2_zps3bec3ed9.jpg&hash=cbde389b69ec5da876ced5729532b74021e7dda5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/TELot2_zps3bec3ed9.jpg.html)
Above is a TE lot with a cantilever signal and some wires I added. This is purely for demonstration only. As you can see the wires on the TE Lot run flush with the B Type Wires that have been T21ed. If the length of the TE lot is odd in lenght, ie 1 or 3 tiles, a grass lot as you can see will be needed to one of the ends of the TE lots to uncover a some more Type B Wires an poles. This is to make the wires run flush since an odd TE lot will make one end of the wires flush but the other end non flush.
I may take this opportunity to thank the original creator of this lot and if anyone would like me to try to add wires to their TE lot stations for demonstration feel free to ask. I would like to show a TE lot railway station but only with the original creators permission.
-eggman121
It looks a bit to heavy, the members are way to thick for grid construction.
The four corner members together has about the right size for a solid column.
Quote from: vester on December 23, 2013, 02:39:30 PM
It looks a bit to heavy, the members are way to thick for grid construction.
The four corner members together has about the right size for a solid column.
Hello Vester. The overhead cantilever signals are not my creation. It was merely left the to show the wires of the TE lot. I think Droric has made some more realistic signals which I'm eager to try. I probably should have said this in my earlier post.
-eggman121
Not to disappoint, here is a quick render of the Canadian Railway signals I am modeling for use on the side of the tracks as opposed to overhead signals. I was recovering from some medical issues that last couple days induced by my cats and allergies so I haven't gotten around to rendering them in game yet. There are still some details missing such as foot guards for replacing or servicing the lights and the guards for the small ladder to prevent non railway personnel from climbing them.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FPlLXmHD.jpg&hash=be1126d37912416b9ed74e376c3ba1f0bab1a751)
Looks nice!
Are you going to be making any British or German style signals? Ones that are generally just a basic pole. :)
Good job on the catenaries &apls &apls
Regarding the signals, just to let you know a frenchie did a pack with really interesting models:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toutsimcities.com%2Fimg%2Fdownloads%2Fthumb%2Fimage_1969.jpg&hash=e2ec1455c051ad2ce6c395fccd5a598fe0db5821) (http://www.toutsimcities.com/downloads/view/1969)
Thanks Girafe
I have been working on placing railway catenaries on transport enabled lots lately and I am going to release some props for Lot makers to see which ways is most feasible. The wire has been offset so it only needs to be placed at the edge of the tile and rotated the correct way around. I recommend using SC4Pim from the LEX since it is more precise than the Maxis Lot editor.
The props can be found here...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3waR3GbCY2fRGxLYmxBcHZfdzA/edit?usp=sharing
If you want to make your own station poles here are the dimensions.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStationPoleDimentions_zpsd1827be0.jpg&hash=97b3c9400453a7db31fe70b7f8db2ac09b1454ab) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StationPoleDimentions_zpsd1827be0.jpg.html)
Here is the Jasoncw - Perry Station with catenaries using SC4 pim lot editor. This was just a test lot to see which way was best to add electrification props to TE Lot stations. I will not be releasing it since it someone else's work but the original creator is free to use my props.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FPerryStation_zpse537934e.jpg&hash=72ecf7f364e8e4c5ebe87b4977921a5ee21d5667) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/PerryStation_zpse537934e.jpg.html)
Different types of wire may be released later but for the moment I am only releasing the Type B wire
Keen to see what stations people come up with.
-eggman121
Eggman perhaps you could make a lot with overhanging props that would allow the wires to extend into all kinds of lots and stations.
He Willy, dont forget the STR with Pegs Crossroads &idea
Well. I read all this topic and I have juste one thing to say: all this work look fantastic and ambitious. I can't wait to test it in my next city. :thumbsup:
Wonderful work fellas!
Great work guys &apls! I love the new textures :satisfied:. Just one thing though ;D - In UDI mode, the arrows for the track switches do not show up ()what(). Just thought I'd let you guys know ::).
Quote from: Girafe on December 25, 2013, 01:38:23 AM
Regarding the signals, just to let you know a frenchie did a pack with really interesting models:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toutsimcities.com%2Fimg%2Fdownloads%2Fthumb%2Fimage_1969.jpg&hash=e2ec1455c051ad2ce6c395fccd5a598fe0db5821) (http://www.toutsimcities.com/downloads/view/1969)
I am having some difficulties finding reference photos to model the signals after. This is what I came up with from some searches on European railway signals. Also attached are the Canadian styled frame trackside signals. I will probably get a few more modeled up and release a lot pack and a prop pack.
To whoever else commented on the signals thanks for your comments I am terrible at responding individually :P
Quote from: trabman11 on December 29, 2013, 07:31:07 AM
Great work guys &apls! I love the new textures :satisfied:. Just one thing though ;D - In UDI mode, the arrows for the track switches do not show up ()what(). Just thought I'd let you guys know ::).
Correct, these are governed by a certain setting in the paths which I overlooked. I had promised to get to it which I had better deliver on, apparently.
Cheers
Willy
Hi all, were I can find installer of this great plugin ? or can you send me in a rar files, the files of RRW ?
thanks you
An Alpha version is included in the NAM 32 Pre-Release.
Greetings and salutations from the ghosts of modders past!
I just wanted to send congrats and commendations to the excellent work you have done with this. I understand that much more is in the works and that it will vastly improve the way rail transportation networks are handled in SC4. Keep it up and don't lose focus.
I have read all 27 pages of this topic and noticed some discord back in June over the color palette used for this project. As a former texture artist for SC4 mods, I can certainly understand the frustration of finding the right colors to represent railroad tracks as seen from above in bright sunlight.
I will be honest in saying that the "rusty" look struck my eye at first as being "too rusty" for mainlines, but perfect for freight lines. I have no advice on how to balance that look as crushed rock ballast is different all over the world. This is just a visual opinion, and, I would say that you should leave it for the purists to come up with their own textures (which they will more than likely do in order to simulate regional preferences). Using the darkened steel for the rails was spot on, and having the shiny, well used rail show up only on close zoom level is a brilliant idea.
For myself, when designing the railyards, I had the frustration of first matching the texture palettes to Maxis zany track textures and then later to the texture palette chosen by the RAM team. My designs tended to favor the "grungy" industrial look and the black-grey-white Maxis palette never looked quite right. Which leads me to another point.
I heard or saw that these rails are model based? If so, then this is excellent news. I read in this topic that this newer concept allows you to place flora and other objects closer to the track-line? Awesome! No more "blocky" wasted tiles! With the current high definition mayor mode flora that is available, making grungy industrial lines could never be easier!
And the hard work in the design of those electric catenary! stunning! they are beautiful.
I also read that this design uses a narrower gauge? Will that cause problems for the custom content lots that matched up to the Maxis gauge? Is there a transition tile available? Just curious.
In summary, I will say that you and your team have done an amazing job on this project. Keep doing what you're doing and bask in the high praise you will get for this addition to the NAM.
Nort country dude!!!is nice to see you back :thumbsup:
WB Northcountrydude. I use many of your rail items you created.
I had a question for Willy or Eggman. I am about ready to release the models/lots for the signals i created but was wondering if there was a way to prevent the wealthing from occurring on the RRW tiles. The tiles get a dirt base texture when I place my lot next to it using high wealth. I also tried no wealth same result.
Quote from: droric on January 15, 2014, 05:24:55 PM
WB Northcountrydude. I use many of your rail items you created.
I had a question for Willy or Eggman. I am about ready to release the models/lots for the signals i created but was wondering if there was a way to prevent the wealthing from occurring on the RRW tiles. The tiles get a dirt base texture when I place my lot next to it using high wealth. I also tried no wealth same result.
Hello Droric. The Railway Upgrade Mod created by Rivit has an option to remove wealth from the RRW tiles. I have just tested it and it works. Not specific to the RRW and only the wealthication options in the Installer needs to be checked but this may suffice until a specific mod to remove the wealth from the RRW is presented.
You can get it from simtropolis here: http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/25809-railway-upgrade-mod/
-eggman121
I did not know that that file still worked for the RRW! Works like a charm (the RRW base texture has some awful orientation problems that need sorting). I could put up with the missing road textures and other quirks, but that one issue almost had me back in the arms of Maxis and Rivit!
Thanks Stephen!
Quote from: eggman121 on January 15, 2014, 06:58:14 PM
Hello Droric. The Railway Upgrade Mod created by Rivit has an option to remove wealth from the RRW tiles. I have just tested it and it works. Not specific to the RRW and only the wealthication options in the Installer needs to be checked but this may suffice until a specific mod to remove the wealth from the RRW is presented.
You can get it from simtropolis here: http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/25809-railway-upgrade-mod/
-eggman121
Eggman thanks for the prompt response. I have uploaded my signals to the STEX and have included a link for anyone who has been following. Thanks for the support.
http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/29204-rail-signal-lotsmodels/
Thank you all for the amazing work! :thumbsup:
Just one question: Is the draggable FARR available somewhere as a separate download?
E'er since NAM 31, all NAM components come in one large package. Anything separate is outdated, and will never be offered outside of development circles (for good reason).
This mythical thing you describe, it is addressed in the readme for the RRW; it is awaiting proper implementation, and will be released when ready, sometime in the future NAM cycles (hopefully sooner than later). This is of course dependent on how easy it is to implement and execute, and may take some thinking through to find a reasonable working model. All such functionality you may have seen in videos was part of the NAM Team alpha builds, and for stability and usability reasons have not yet been released. For now, we all have to stick with the puzzle pieces; at least overhangs should greatly increase their functionality and usability!
Just to clarify, RRW has LHD paths, right?
Sorry folks, I've had no time since Christmas to do anything at all, and it'll be a while before I do. As far as I can recall only a few minor bugs were fixed for the full release; that excludes the crossings.
Quote from: north country dude on January 14, 2014, 12:49:57 PM
I heard or saw that these rails are model based? If so, then this is excellent news. I read in this topic that this newer concept allows you to place flora and other objects closer to the track-line? Awesome! No more "blocky" wasted tiles! With the current high definition mayor mode flora that is available, making grungy industrial lines could never be easier!
Good to hear from you NCD!
I'm not sure where you read that, but that's not actually possible. The models are 16x16m. I assume one would have to convert them to something like 10x16m to achieve that. The problem is I'm not a modeler, and have no modeling software available to achieve this type of thing. The fact that the tiles are model-based is relatively inconsequential on the user-end of things; they're certainly no 3D models but just flat planes.
Quote from: north country dude on January 14, 2014, 12:49:57 PMI also read that this design uses a narrower gauge? Will that cause problems for the custom content lots that matched up to the Maxis gauge? Is there a transition tile available? Just curious.
The narrowing is rather minor and shouldn't cause major problems. Perfectionists may have to do some prop relotting, though.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on January 17, 2014, 04:09:47 AM
Just to clarify, RRW has LHD paths, right?
I have no idea. You would be able to tell better than me.
Quote from: APSMS on January 16, 2014, 12:41:28 AM
(the RRW base texture has some awful orientation problems that need sorting)
What would those problems be?
Cheers
Willy
Hi, I've been following this thread from close to its beginning but this is my first time posting, on the forum as well. ;D
I love the new textures and paths, it's all so much more realistic, but it seems rather laggy, about a second or two's pause, when I try to draw new or redraw old rail, I thought this might just be my set-up but Haljackey seems to get it a little in his latest video. Also, are there fixed versions of Marrast's stations, as in some screenshots they seem to be compatible with RRW? I find them near essential as they're the best diagonal stations I've found.
Thanks for RRW and the NAM as a whole. :)
The RRW doesn't appear to support LHD paths yet. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some code that will make the process of adding LHD support that much harder.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on January 18, 2014, 05:34:17 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if there was some code that will make the process of adding LHD support that much harder.
Actually, the fact that the paths aren't showing up indicates that there is already at least something in place in the Network INI to support LHD path remapping. If there wasn't, the RRW would have RHD paths in LHD (and would technically function).
-Alex
Quote from: Wiimeiser on January 18, 2014, 05:34:17 PM
The RRW doesn't appear to support LHD paths yet. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some code that will make the process of adding LHD support that much harder.
Does your folder "z_Left Hand Plugin" contain a file "RealRailway_LHD.dat"?
No, it does not. I have a RailwayAddonMod_STR_LEFT_HAND_VERSIONS_ONLY_Required_Additional_Plugin.dat but that's probably needed anyway.
It doesn't seem to have ended up in the installer then. I hope Willy doesn't mind, if I attach the file here. Put it into the "z_Left Hand Plugin" folder.
Thanks, that worked. There's still an odd pause for some odd reason, but at least it's pathed.
Strange, I keep hearing this from people. I'd like it if folks who have installed this mod could report whether or not they experience any lag or pause laying down rails, either RHD or LHD.
Cheers
Willy
PS: Thanks Markus for taking care of that.
After adding the file from memo the lag disappears for me. Although I redrew my tacks again after adding it, so that could be why some people still get lag.
For upgrading stations, is it just a case of using the lot editor to replace the texture with RRW's?
Quote from: Glavespian on January 19, 2014, 03:28:08 AM
After adding the file from memo the lag disappears for me. Although I redrew my tacks again after adding it, so that could be why some people still get lag.
For upgrading stations, is it just a case of using the lot editor to replace the texture with RRW's?
For most stations the RRW texture should appear automatically for straight rail. For custom textures such as NCD's texture packs for rail it will be the same since it has not been updated.
Unfortunately there will be a bit of lag time before any RRW specific textures are created since the original modders made the the textures specific to maxis rail. There is a slight gauge change and alignment to reflect RL in the RRW. I plan to contact NCD and offer my BSC range to create specific textures and catenaries since I myself am a perfectionist and want to offer as much support as possible to the RRW since the Maxis rail has a curtailed future as far as the NAM is concerned.
-eggman121
Quote from: Swordmaster on January 19, 2014, 03:14:28 AM
Strange, I keep hearing this from people. I'd like it if folks who have installed this mod could report whether or not they experience any lag or pause laying down rails, either RHD or LHD.
Cheers
Willy
PS: Thanks Markus for taking care of that.
I have large delays when laying out RRW tiles. Any time an intersection needs to be calculated there is a long delay where the game seems to just sit for a few seconds. I also am unable to make any ortho or diag street/ave/rd STR intersections (I swear this worked without RRW maybe not diag but ortho). Also all my DTR intersections are reverting to maxis textures. I cleaned up my plugins folder thinking it was something from pre-release or from development stages but I still seem to have the issue.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi324.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk325%2Fdethsrow%2FFlukeology%2FFluke1_zpsc826bf05.jpg&hash=7ab4fe4c6f305283ef7d83cb29d66a8ede4cbfd6)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi324.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk325%2Fdethsrow%2FFlukeology%2FFluke2_zpsc537f3f5.jpg&hash=9c2c0bc59db11eebe4b1f3a1dd4c6b68fcc869e0)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi324.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk325%2Fdethsrow%2FFlukeology%2FFluke3_zps4be3bbe6.jpg&hash=3fe18dfb1b6ef6b44ba1173fc6ee9488fe0ce087)
Somethings not right I have some textures not showing up not sure what the problem is.
Quote from: Dethsrow on January 19, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Somethings not right I have some textures not showing up not sure what the problem is.
Seems you have Rivit's Rail Upgrade Mod installed; uninstall it, since it and every other Rail texture mod confilcts with the RRW.
I have some extremely odd behavior. I was building some retaining walls for a rail overpass and to my suprise the textures that were previously showing maxis textures now show the RRW textures. Nothing else changed except me rebuilding the overpass and onslope pieces. It seems I can get it to display the old maxis textures and the RRW textures randomly.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on January 19, 2014, 11:56:10 AM
Quote from: Dethsrow on January 19, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Somethings not right I have some textures not showing up not sure what the problem is.
Seems you have Rivit's Rail Upgrade Mod installed; uninstall it, since it and every other Rail texture mod confilcts with the RRW.
Apparently I believe I did uninstall rivit's rail mod I ran cleanitol and also searched for it in my plugins folder nothing pops up other than the readme files
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on January 19, 2014, 11:56:10 AM
Quote from: Dethsrow on January 19, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Somethings not right I have some textures not showing up not sure what the problem is.
Seems you have Rivit's Rail Upgrade Mod installed; uninstall it, since it and every other Rail texture mod confilcts with the RRW.
Nevermind I found it and uninstalled it, however does this effect why I can't get the STR diagnol crossings to appear properly
Downloaded & installed the lht patch in Memo's post, but RRW under RD-2 L1 has lht paths on road and rht paths on RRW.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2FAppledelight%2FSC4%2FNAMLandFunTimeWorld%2Fshowcase_borough-12_jan.__001390161899.png&hash=2a66d3d449bb4034155dc64f14416e3b6428cae4)
Most likely, there's no LHD path remapping in place for that particular instance. It likely applies regardless of whether or not the RRW is installed.
-Alex
Swordmaster/Willy: sorry, my bad.
QuoteThe fact that the tiles are model-based is relatively inconsequential on the user-end of things; they're certainly no 3D models but just flat planes.
That is probably what I read somewhere and misunderstood. There were some pics presented that showed flora very close to the track-line,... bottom of page 7, and you mention on page 8;
Quote... the reason why I put in the trees is that the attentive visitor might notice the trees are on the same tile as the rails, which also explains how this setup is possible without any new coding or textures. It's a long-standing public request to reduce waste of tiles.
It is this awesomeness that I was referring too. Most rail right-of-ways have weeds, dead branches, old rail ties, rocks and other detritus close to the track-lines, and the ability to place this type of debris closer to the track-lines can make a railroad look natural, while creating the appearance of having been there for a while.
Anyway, keep on creating more awesomeness. Judging from the comments here and elsewhere, you and your design team's work is greatly appreciated by the community and I have the feeling that it will eventually become the standard for rail transportation in SC4.
I have traffic on the left, downloaded the patch, and there are paths and no lag after placing rail.
Quote from: Dethsrow on January 19, 2014, 12:05:35 PM
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on January 19, 2014, 11:56:10 AM
Quote from: Dethsrow on January 19, 2014, 11:52:09 AM
Somethings not right I have some textures not showing up not sure what the problem is.
Seems you have Rivit's Rail Upgrade Mod installed; uninstall it, since it and every other Rail texture mod confilcts with the RRW.
Nevermind I found it and uninstalled it, however does this effect why I can't get the STR diagnol crossings to appear properly
My guess is that the pavement mod is conflicting with the level-crossing textures, try removing it.
Hello, I am having some trouble with the RRW. I have NAM 32 installed and no other mods are installed. I am seeing maxis textures or no textures at all on all my rail x road crossings. Are there any options in NAM 32 that conflict or override the RRW crossing textures?
Quote from: estescc on January 22, 2014, 04:26:18 PM
Hello, I am having some trouble with the RRW. I have NAM 32 installed and no other mods are installed. I am seeing maxis textures or no textures at all on all my rail x road crossings. Are there any options in NAM 32 that conflict or override the RRW crossing textures?
RRW crossings are not supported at this time.
Quote from: Geometry123 on January 23, 2014, 04:11:56 PM
Quote from: estescc on January 22, 2014, 04:26:18 PM
Hello, I am having some trouble with the RRW. I have NAM 32 installed and no other mods are installed. I am seeing maxis textures or no textures at all on all my rail x road crossings. Are there any options in NAM 32 that conflict or override the RRW crossing textures?
RRW crossings are not supported at this time.
Ah OK. They look great in the photos on this thread. Can't wait for the next update. :thumbsup:
While I realize the RRW is still in progress, could you guys please make sure that the pathfiles for the switches are set correctly. I found myself unable to switch tracks at junctions in UDI with the current iteration of RRW.
Also, are more features planned for the STR? A friend of mine likes to use STR for the main railways in rural and lesser populated areas and was rather unhappy with how limited the STR is in comparison to the DTR.
Thanks.
Quote from: Swamper77 on January 26, 2014, 10:34:45 PM
While I realize the RRW is still in progress, could you guys please make sure that the pathfiles for the switches are set correctly. I found myself unable to switch tracks at junctions in UDI with the current iteration of RRW.
Also, are more features planned for the STR? A friend of mine likes to use STR for the main railways in rural and lesser populated areas and was rather unhappy with how limited the STR is in comparison to the DTR.
Thanks.
Yes I also have that problem. I also posted a comment on this, and found out that it's just a pathing issue, so you can still switch tracks :), but you don't know what track you will be switching to ()sad().
Heya Kids :)
I'm not really sure if I should post this here or at the NAM thread but, since this is mainly a texture thing, I thought of doing it here.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi483.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Frr194%2FRings_of_Saturn%2FSimCity%25204%2Fth_textures.png&hash=4cdc073c836e85d0fc0639a9e22ecfaac807aae5) (http://s483.photobucket.com/user/Rings_of_Saturn/media/SimCity%204/textures.png.html)
I noticed that the ground rail to overhead pp (straight) was not textured yet but the same piece for diagonal was updated already. Thought it weird...
Also in the diagonal piece, a bit of the old texture is either protruding or reverting back. Could it be because of the slope and the implementation of the RRW texture?
Can anyone confirm it's not only me or that it's in your 'to-do list', Willy?
PS: Also that are some rail conflicting mods that should be included in the cleanitol, in the next iteration of the NAM. I had to 'search and destroy' two of them by hand. It'd have been a pretty laborious job if my plug-ins folder was a mess.
I apologize in advance if this has already been answered - but I've gone through the entire thread and am pretty sure I didn't find it.
Anyway, while I very much love the new textures and have converted most of my networks happily, I'm having issues with the rail dirt next to occupied tiles. I have tried both the PEG and swamper no dirt mods, but no luck. Someone here mentioned Rivit's mod, which I had just uninstalled due to the conflicts, but I reinstalled just the wealthification options and still there's dirt squares about.
Is there something I'm doing wrong perhaps? If there is not an existing mod, but there is a way to mod this myself, I would be willing to do so as well.
Also, as noted in another post, I'm still having old textures on the ground to elevated viaduct puzzle piece, but the others are correctly textured.
I notice I can't build double diagonal DTR RRW, like I could with Maxis rail. Is this feature not supported, or is it something I'm doing wrong?
@metarvo: it's no longer supported as you can read on the RRW ReadMe files
When i lay down rail i get a lag spike ()sad()
Quote from: FlyHigh on January 28, 2014, 02:04:11 PM
Heya Kids :)
I'm not really sure if I should post this here or at the NAM thread but, since this is mainly a texture thing, I thought of doing it here.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi483.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Frr194%2FRings_of_Saturn%2FSimCity%25204%2Fth_textures.png&hash=4cdc073c836e85d0fc0639a9e22ecfaac807aae5) (http://s483.photobucket.com/user/Rings_of_Saturn/media/SimCity%204/textures.png.html)
I noticed that the ground rail to overhead pp (straight) was not textured yet but the same piece for diagonal was updated already. Thought it weird...
Also in the diagonal piece, a bit of the old texture is either protruding or reverting back. Could it be because of the slope and the implementation of the RRW texture?
Can anyone confirm it's not only me or that it's in your 'to-do list', Willy?
PS: Also that are some rail conflicting mods that should be included in the cleanitol, in the next iteration of the NAM. I had to 'search and destroy' two of them by hand. It'd have been a pretty laborious job if my plug-ins folder was a mess.
I had the same problem, and at first I thought it was a conflict with another rail mod I had missed. After a lot of checking, however, I found that there seems to be something wrong with RRW and the brown rail viaducts, at least in my game. Moving this file in the NAM folder out of my plugins fixed the texture, so I'm stuck with grey viaducts for now:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpuu.sh%2F6pebH&hash=f5f027e26736615215d94d7c434d19b09c19829b)
Willy never intended those transitions to be RRW supported as it would be impossible for a train to climb a grade anywhere near that steep. I'm guessing the diagonal textures that do appear only do so because they share a texture with the regular elevated diagonal pieces. I'd be extremely surprised if he changed his mind on the matter.
So, if those transitions aren't officially supported, which ones are? There is a distinct lack of any other ground-to-viaduct transition piece, at least in my installation. I can't believe that the RRW paradigm is for viaduct rail to exist in isolation from ground level rail. Am I missing something? ()what()
Quote from: noahclem on January 30, 2014, 01:21:15 PM
Willy never intended those transitions to be RRW supported as it would be impossible for a train to climb a grade anywhere near that steep. I'm guessing the diagonal textures that do appear only do so because they share a texture with the regular elevated diagonal pieces. I'd be extremely surprised if he changed his mind on the matter.
Quote from: Wthrwyz on January 30, 2014, 05:14:57 PM
So, if those transitions aren't officially supported, which ones are? There is a distinct lack of any other ground-to-viaduct transition piece, at least in my installation. I can't believe that the RRW paradigm is for viaduct rail to exist in isolation from ground level rail. Am I missing something? ()what()
The pieces do have the correct RRW texture when you use the default grey viaducts:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpuu.sh%2F6perr&hash=a8368f99cad1e483168272b227ff4fb4b4d9640c)
Quote from: Wthrwyz on January 30, 2014, 05:14:57 PM
So, if those transitions aren't officially supported, which ones are?
None of the existing ones. The RRW is in a Pre-Alpha state and is largely unfinished.
Alpha or not, seems a bit...I don't want to use the word "useless" here...I guess not useful to be unable to transition between the two. ::)
I guess the answer is to stick with on-slope transitions for the time being until a new ground-to-elevated transition is developed.
Please don't take this in the wrong way. Seriously, I'm not trying to be insulting or condescending in any way here. I know RRW is in its very early phases and am perfectly happy to use it as-is until it fleshes out. I guess I'm just pointing this out in my own silly way.
Eh, if it hasn't been made, it hasn't been made. Seems more likely that it's a bug since it works with the default viaducts.
Some things are going to be converted before others. Since it's a matter of opinion as to what pieces are most important, you can't please everybody. I personally never use those ramps. Too steep. But I also rarely use STR. That, of course, was a priority to convert.
The other thing to consider is that the draggable Rail viaducts project is under the RRW umbrella. The old puzzle pieces are kind of a stopgap. There's a lot of things that are still in a transitional phase across the board. We're really at the start of a new era on the NAM front.
-Alex
Alex, you know that when you say things about a new era of the NAM you just make everyone about the amazing stuff that is planned?? :P :D :D
Thanks for the comments and questions everyone. I'm sorry I couldn't get to them, but I'm officially without computer these days. I thought to return from a short break around this period, but my trusty old machine finally succumbed to old age and left me stranded. And that's a month after I passed on my laptop to a friend %wrd
It'll be a few months before I can get a replacement I'm afraid, so RRW work including bug fixing is on hold for a while.
Quote from: jdenm8 on January 30, 2014, 05:37:03 PM
Quote from: Wthrwyz on January 30, 2014, 05:14:57 PM
So, if those transitions aren't officially supported, which ones are?
None of the existing ones. The RRW is in a Pre-Alpha state and is largely unfinished.
I digress, the base network is largely finished. It was in pre-alpha, and then it didn't get any bug reports, so I called it a beta ;)
Regarding the ground-to-elevated transitions, Noah is correct in that I personally don't intend to support them for the stated reasons. On-slope pieces are more realistic.
Cheers
Willy
Depending on the texture set used, (I use Rivit's steel and concrete viaducts), you may still get remnants of the old texture. This is something that seriously needs to be considered when we have five or six possible viaduct texture variations and they all need to be consistently done.
Unless the viaducts are also gonna get a makeover?
Id like to congratulate Willy and all who helped on the RRW so far - I've converted about 30 of my test cities and really only find snafus with STR - Base and DTR seem quite solid - no showstoppers there. The conversion to RRW is quite easy (going back isn't - so back up first).
I will be issuing a RUM for RRW set shortly - it will at least have all of my existing viaducts (and a couple of new ones), re-rendered tunnels DTR and STR (I've also fixed the Maxis one by editing it) and RRW crossings for my street sets. This should fix the dangling rail texture which is attached to a part of the viaducts. and comprises the addons I've made.
I've also had a go at all of the base crossings (street, road, OWR, avenue) and a re-implementation of the T21s for the plunderer catenaries we see used most (which of course don't exist for the new pieces) - about halfway though those and will only release these if the team thinks its OK.
Good to hear you're working on a RUM for RRW Rivit!!! &apls
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 02, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
I thought to return from a short break around this period, but my trusty old machine finally succumbed to old age and left me stranded. And that's a month after I passed on my laptop to a friend %wrd
Hmmm... wonder what kind of websites this friend has been visiting.
Quote from: roadgeek on February 06, 2014, 07:29:54 PM
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 02, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
I thought to return from a short break around this period, but my trusty old machine finally succumbed to old age and left me stranded. And that's a month after I passed on my laptop to a friend %wrd
Hmmm... wonder what kind of websites this friend has been visiting.
What's your point?
Cheers
Willy
Wires have come FAR3 way :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Wires1_zps2d010eb1.jpg&hash=503238904f85236e99d4b9f8a73e4636182084c9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Wires1_zps2d010eb1.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Wires2_zpsc3a169b6.jpg&hash=edfe92259eef776718cd9cf2357d13d399b57596) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Wires2_zpsc3a169b6.jpg.html)
Yep that is the orthogonal, Diagonal and Partial FARRW Straight Sections done. It was no easy task. I had to find the corresponding SC4path Files to T21 the catenaries props onto the puzzle pieces. What is more, the calculations where zorked to say the least with many attempts to correctly place the wires. The wires themselves where easy enough to make. So while the straights are almost done the next task will be to put catenaries on the WRC and FAR3 turnouts and curves which will be well... Fun
-eggman121
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 08, 2014, 08:02:00 AM
Quote from: roadgeek on February 06, 2014, 07:29:54 PM
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 02, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
I thought to return from a short break around this period, but my trusty old machine finally succumbed to old age and left me stranded. And that's a month after I passed on my laptop to a friend %wrd
Hmmm... wonder what kind of websites this friend has been visiting.
What's your point?
Cheers
Willy
We may never know.....
eggman121: Those cantries (is that how you spell it?) look great! &apls
@eggman121:
Hope, I can use your catenaries somedays &apls
-------------------
Excellent work eggman! &apls &apls &apls
Great to hear from you Willy and bummer about your computer :( If I had an old one that was even remotely functional it'd already be on its way to Belgium but unfortunately I don't. Also, what kind of websites has your friend been viewing?
Beautiful catenary work Eggman &apls
Good to hear from you as well buddy. I think I get the point now--my laptop and my old machine are not the same. I would have used the laptop as a replacement, which I can't now unless I claim it back.
Anyway, those FACs (FAOWs?) are awesome Stephen! :thumbsup:
Cheers
Willy
Eggman, fantastic!
It's not my cup of tea, but I tend to get the feeling that the task lying in front of you is... well... Fun. Just what you said.
So that is great, because the whole purpose of this game is to have fun, isn't it?
I wish you good luck and I can't wait to see the results some day!
Frank
Thanks for all the positive feedback :thumbsup: It really inspires me to continue my work.
Anyway here is what I have been working on lately.
Let the Fun Begin!!! $%Grinno$%
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Turnout1_zps15766474.jpg&hash=6aff9959a54d80d6ed81dee6cfde1a2d245729d5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Turnout1_zps15766474.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Turnout2_zpsd8446c82.jpg&hash=d3715c4f893716b4acfaf004b0c063e5f91410ff) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Turnout2_zpsd8446c82.jpg.html)
Ironically it is the FAR3 content which is easiest to apply wires to. Anything with significant curvature across multiple tiles is gonna be a real pain to place wires on correctly. Lucky all my calculations are working out.
-eggman121
If I'd been drinking my coffee when I looked at that, I'd have ruined my computer! (spitting it out, that is). :P Those pictures/wires are simply incredible! I can't believe all the work you're putting into this; it's really paying off. Thanks for sharing with us.
I'm telling you, I'm going to have to come up with a good reason to modernize my region...no other catenaries have made me actually want to use them beyond the initial test phase ::) (not used to electrified rail), but these, well...
&apls
Aaaaaaaah it's coming.
Fantastic work! &apls
Just curious, how many T21s are required for FAR pieces, taking orientation, flipping, mirroring and all that into account? &Thk/(
Amazing work eggman!Those switches are just...amazing!they look real &apls
Thanks everyone!
Quote from: vortext on February 13, 2014, 03:40:08 AM
Fantastic work! &apls
Just curious, how many T21s are required for FAR pieces, taking orientation, flipping, mirroring and all that into account? &Thk/(
I assume you are talking about the switch
I have not done all Flips yet but with all rotations covered and flipped it would take the whole allocation of 16 unique exemplars on all the different rotations for a tile. Maybe less if I can share rotations (eg North South) but I don't think that will be the case.
The Straight FAR took 8 exemplars per tile. In my experiences you have to go by the sc4path file for some transit items for T21ing
-eggman121
Marvellous &apls &apls &apls
Great work, eggman121.
Quote from: eggman121 on February 08, 2014, 02:16:55 PM
Wires have come FAR3 way :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Wires1_zps2d010eb1.jpg&hash=503238904f85236e99d4b9f8a73e4636182084c9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Wires1_zps2d010eb1.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Wires2_zpsc3a169b6.jpg&hash=edfe92259eef776718cd9cf2357d13d399b57596) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Wires2_zpsc3a169b6.jpg.html)
Yep that is the orthogonal, Diagonal and Partial FARRW Straight Sections done. It was no easy task. I had to find the corresponding SC4path Files to T21 the catenaries props onto the puzzle pieces. What is more, the calculations where zorked to say the least with many attempts to correctly place the wires. The wires themselves where easy enough to make. So while the straights are almost done the next task will be to put catenaries on the WRC and FAR3 turnouts and curves which will be well... Fun
-eggman121
This is amazing! Even I who hate everything related to Railroad Stuff (Maxis or Modded) am waiting for this :D
Willy, I know you like to surprise people but could you give us just an idea of what you're planning to do with RRW?the basic RAM and STR set has been almost completed...
Quote from: Gugu3 on February 14, 2014, 03:01:10 AM
Willy, I know you like to surprise people but could you give us just an idea of what you're planning to do with RRW?the basic RAM and STR set has been almost completed...
Currently, there's not much going on. Willy is very busy with RL and, on top of that, doesn't have an operable machine. It is likely that the remaining issues of the released stuff get tackled first, before any significant new additions, but as there's literally no progress at the moment, as with most parts of the NAM, there's really nothing to tell about.
Thanks for your prompt reply Memo!was just curious ;) I know Willy is busy/not really operative at the moment and agree about the fact that some issues have to be tackled first!
Enjoying eggman work in the meanwhile $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$%
If you flip back through the thread you can find lots of info Willy has given about future content.
Thanks for all the previous positive comments :thumbsup:.
Anyway while willy is away I may try to pitch in with some new content.
The one set of items that is preventing me from using the RRW in my cities is Bridges... So I decided to make some :D. Here is the first one. I have some stone Viaducts coming but here is the first Bridge I have managed to BAT.
It replaces the Undertruss Bridge in my installation but the hope is to have it as an additional bridge. The wake effect T21 on the pylon kills the catenaries >:(, so dedicated bridge IIDs will probably be needed to get around the problem.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FBridge1_zpsd1e55bc1.jpg&hash=6838e1c09c1694df3b5cbdd3daac3d1848d77aca) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Bridge1_zpsd1e55bc1.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FBridge2_zps7c9a086e.jpg&hash=c4ec8976d9799dbfafca66ef2bca088904fb92e2) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Bridge2_zps7c9a086e.jpg.html)
This is my first attempt at bridge building so feel free to comment on where I can improve.
-eggman121
I see you need some tight LODding there to make correct the appearance of the pylon. I also miss horizontal cross-beams from a construction engineering perspective.
Nice attempt eggman!it's good to hear you're getting more involved in the project! &apls
The textures on the bridge are very nice
Now I have taken onboard Mandelsoft's advice and re-rendered the models. It took a bit of reading and is still a work in progress but I think I have the Bridges done. At this point who should I speak to about getting these bridges into the NAM as additional bridges. I have some more Bridge designs so any help in this regard would be welcome. As you can see the pylon still kills the catenaries in the first picture, something I have been trying to avoid.
The models also work for the elevated viaduct bridge as shown in the last picture.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FBridge3_zps4e2997cc.jpg&hash=e1becb27cd9f36386abc67cd88f56dfcc25a46c3) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Bridge3_zps4e2997cc.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%253Cbr%2520%2F%253E%2FBridge4_zpsa317620d.jpg&hash=f86c58b6456bf743794eb6677c7498cdb869d1f9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Bridge4_zpsa317620d.jpg.html)
-eggman121
I like the bridge itself, but I dont see why should the bridge have a lighter texture than the actual rail... In my opinion, the texture should follow a uniform path tranition, that way, you cant really tell when the bridge starts
Looking great! :thumbsup: Would like to see STR bridges as well.
Quote from: cmdp123789 on February 17, 2014, 05:54:05 PM
I like the bridge itself, but I dont see why should the bridge have a lighter texture than the actual rail... In my opinion, the texture should follow a uniform path tranition, that way, you cant really tell when the bridge starts
Agreed. If bridge and non-bridge textures are going to be the same, it should have a seamless look.
You know you can assign multiple T21s to one tile, right? You just have to change the patterns of them so they don't conflict with one another
The texture probably hasn't been colour corrected yet. Perhaps it'd be better to have the surface as a flat plane - that way it's also compatible with Maxis rail.
Hi eggman,
The bridges are really nice. I won't bother you with remarks on the textures, because that is not my cup of tea.
I will bother you with construction instead. ;D
From a construction point of view the pylons are way too thin. This will especially show when the valleys become ravines and get deeper. Also in the last image I think the span of the bridge is too long. Either there should be a pylon somewhere, or the heigth of the construction should be higher. A construction of this kind usually can span about ten times its heigth. And of course you may stretch that a bit in SC4, but not too much in my opinion.
But... if you decide to ignore my remarks I will use your bridge anyway. Because I like it.
Lovely bridges eggman!whatever you're gonna do with them (change the texture,the distance between pylons,ecc.) i'll certainly use these bridges as they are really nice!excellent work
Thanks for all the comments so far :thumbsup:. I'm still getting used to bridge building but I have taken you comments on board and corrected the colour saturation and fixed the pylon length.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FBridgeFixup2_zps94a854db.jpg&hash=1c7c03c8cbd21861ea7c4eb9fccd7e6a0dac1f8f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/BridgeFixup2_zps94a854db.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FBridgeFixup1_zps01674e63.jpg&hash=e35c18a315810f3702a08d0a2fba28f4d2c7233c) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/BridgeFixup1_zps01674e63.jpg.html)
To proceed however I will need to add this bridge as an additional bridge since i'm using the warren under-truss bridge exemplar to show it in game.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on February 17, 2014, 11:43:25 PM
The texture probably hasn't been colour corrected yet. Perhaps it'd be better to have the surface as a flat plane - that way it's also compatible with Maxis rail.
That is a great Idea. Luckily i still have the original models to modify.
Quote from: FrankU on February 17, 2014, 11:56:20 PM
Hi eggman,
The bridges are really nice. I won't bother you with remarks on the textures, because that is not my cup of tea.
I will bother you with construction instead. ;D
From a construction point of view the pylons are way too thin. This will especially show when the valleys become ravines and get deeper. Also in the last image I think the span of the bridge is too long. Either there should be a pylon somewhere, or the heigth of the construction should be higher. A construction of this kind usually can span about ten times its heigth. And of course you may stretch that a bit in SC4, but not too much in my opinion.
But... if you decide to ignore my remarks I will use your bridge anyway. Because I like it.
I designed this bridge to cross small creeks as opposed to large body's of water. The pylons themselves taper so they will get wider as the water gets deeper.
Quote from: Gugu3 on February 18, 2014, 01:44:53 AM
Lovely bridges eggman!whatever you're gonna do with them (change the texture,the distance between pylons,ecc.) i'll certainly use these bridges as they are really nice!excellent work
Thanks. With help from others I hope to get it out at some point. Don't know when though.
-eggman121
Nice job on colour saturation and pylons! :thumbsup: are you actually planning to create some more bridges when this one is finished?
WOW! you can definetly see a difference now... I like the transition now.. looks more consistant.. now do you think is there a way to make a texture transition for the pebbles in the bridge? Cause if that can be done.. there's nothing else much needed... GREAT JOB SO FAR! I love your catenaries, and I definetly love this new project
Looking pretty snazzy there Mr. Eggman. &apls The pylons are still a little awkward (plain, and the textures look stretched), but you've almost got a whole set of quality bridges.
BEAUTIFUL!!!!!!! &apls
Yes! &apls
Those last images look more realistic constructionwise. I don't know if you changed anything or just used a more fitting length, but this is OK.
There is a clear difference between your bridge and the other one, but I think you can keep it this way. The texture transition looks realistic in my opinion.
Really great job with the fractional catenaries and the bridges. :thumbsup:
I would change the truss texture with a metallic one and the retaining wall with a brick one and make them a little bit dirty.
Thanks for all the positive comments :thumbsup: If your wondering if I'm going to be making more bridges well here is the next one
Textures still needs to be colour corrected and some geometry changed but here it is...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStoneArch1_zps609b5da8.jpg&hash=b493b37e52a79bd63ccdda672b5e631f3896a75a) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StoneArch1_zps609b5da8.jpg.html)
-eggman121
Nice one eggman!good to see you're working on some new bridges! &apls
:o
I have no words to say... :D
Thank you
But wait... There is more...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FBoxGirderBridge_zpsa7c4db4d.jpg&hash=6a8588250181a1b4743962764abee4f55dd99979) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/BoxGirderBridge_zpsa7c4db4d.jpg.html)
Still needs some colour correction but that is it. A bit white for my liking. This is a box girder bridge.
-eggman121
OMG! ::)
Amazing!
These are amazing eggman! How difficult would it be to create these as single track versions?
Thanks for all your hard work!
As long as we get some nice old arched bridges in that style my life is great, those look great. (I have changed my opinion of
n the grey ballast and now prefer the current one to the old maxis stuff.
Even with color correction the textures could use some more attention but the modelling is very nice, especially on the arched bridge. &apls
Request for STR versions is hereby seconded. ;)
Keep it up! :thumbsup:
Good to see more bridges being added to the game. Really liking how they are turning out. &apls
Keep up the good work. ;D
Quote from: vortext on February 20, 2014, 12:02:55 PM
Even with color correction the textures could use some more attention but the modelling is very nice, especially on the arched bridge. &apls
Request for STR versions is hereby seconded. ;)
Keep it up! :thumbsup:
Thanks! I'm going to sort something out with the textures for the stone bridge since they are a bit light coloured. The mapping may also need some changing as well.
Anyway you were after STR... well here is the first bridge.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FBoxGirderSTRBridge_zps72ee5f84.jpg&hash=a4d4e7bddfc4ffd81bfb6ef6debfb110bf9f959e) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/BoxGirderSTRBridge_zps72ee5f84.jpg.html)
These bridges have been colour corrected but if any of the modeling need changing please let me know.
-eggman121
Your bridges have come a fair way in a short period of time. With the time and attention you've already devoted to the catenary models, I believe these bridges will make fine additions to the game when all is said and done. Were you able to sort out the issue with the overhead wire and the pylon piece?
-Matt
Lovely bridges!like the STR one! &apls
Quote from: threestooges on February 21, 2014, 02:50:45 AM
Your bridges have come a fair way in a short period of time. With the time and attention you've already devoted to the catenary models, I believe these bridges will make fine additions to the game when all is said and done. Were you able to sort out the issue with the overhead wire and the pylon piece?
-Matt
Thank you. They have come a far way in a short period of time since I have tried to make the models before University starts so I can concentrate on that. Now that I have access to dedicated IIDs for the bridges I am making it won't be long before the issue of the wires conflicting with the pylon wake T21 exemplar is sorted. I plan to keep the wake effect in the catenery mod T21 for all pylons to maintain consistency.
Quote from: Gugu3 on February 21, 2014, 02:54:21 AM
Lovely bridges!like the STR one! &apls
Thanks again. I'm glad you like them.
-eggman121
Edit: New BridgeThis time a iron girder bridge.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FIronGirder_zps14d495e3.jpg&hash=4bd418601007c2dc12eb3b7aa01798d2c31d5a63) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/IronGirder_zps14d495e3.jpg.html)
Now I'm going to put it out to the community. What names should I call the bridges?
-eggman121
This just came to me as I read your post with the iron girder bridge, name it the - Frank Werspuckle Memorial Bridge
Quote from: eggman121 on February 20, 2014, 11:15:09 PM
Anyway you were after STR... well here is the first bridge.
-eggman121
I am So happy! &apls %BUd% &dance
&dance &dance &dance !!!YES!!! &dance &dance &dance
Those bridges look amazing. Can't wait to get my hands on them! :D
I'm loving the progress that is being made with the RRW! I'm looking forward to the next Public Iteration of RRW to implement into my cities!
I'm also loving some of the new catenaries. They have that design similar of those used in Melbourne! AWESOME WORK eggman!
Just a quick question, are there any plans to build a L1 (7.5m) Elevated Heavy Rail, or is that apart of a seperate NAM Project?
I've never heard of any plans such as this, but it sounds interesting. Though, you could achieve the same effect with ground lifters, though that would take up more room than the Level 1 concept you mentioned. %BUd%
Am I really the only one who thinks the textures could use some more work....?
I mean, sure it's nice to have RRW textured bridge, but.... you need to work a bit more on a bridge before going to create a new one..
Still a good initiative. ;)
Quote from: Jimmyson on February 23, 2014, 04:22:53 PM
I'm loving the progress that is being made with the RRW! I'm looking forward to the next Public Iteration of RRW to implement into my cities!
I'm also loving some of the new catenaries. They have that design similar of those used in Melbourne! AWESOME WORK eggman!
Just a quick question, are there any plans to build a L1 (7.5m) Elevated Heavy Rail, or is that apart of a seperate NAM Project?
Since I live just out of Melbourne and travel there all the time on the train that is where I have taken a lot of my inspiration from ;D. From my knowledge there are plans for L1 Railway viaducts. When they get implemented is just a case of wait and see.
Quote from: art128 on February 23, 2014, 04:36:13 PM
Am I really the only one who thinks the textures could use some more work....?
I mean, sure it's nice to have RRW textured bridge, but.... you need to work a bit more on a bridge before going to create a new one..
Still a good initiative. ;)
The textures I am using definitely need some TLC. Both in terms of making and mapping. I have changed tact on how I place the rail textures on the bridges since it is a real pain to colour correct them correctly. I am placing the texture on a separate model and merging the two models together. Cogeo's model tweaker has made the process so much easier. Here is the first bridge that I have shown with the colour correction.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FIronGirder2_zps0a98cde4.jpg&hash=c306562cfd94c8748249d471701577f178c6bd27) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/IronGirder2_zps0a98cde4.jpg.html)
Still needs some work but it is coming together quite well.
-eggman121
&dance &dance ()what() WHA??? ()what() &dance &dance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTSIQPxA
I've never seen this project before, are their any plans for it?
Quote from: Jimmyson on February 23, 2014, 04:22:53 PM
Just a quick question, are there any plans to build a L1 (7.5m) Elevated Heavy Rail, or is that apart of a seperate NAM Project?
Yes, this is mentioned earlier in the thread. Willy posted a picture, but currently his host site Majhost.com is down. Eventually there will be draggable viaducts of varying heights for most networks, roads, highways, rail. This is a very long-term project though.
Eggman: you do realize that Willy has already released color-corrected textures for lots? Also, I think art might have meant the textures on the bridge models themselves. I agree that they could use some more detail and weathering, but if you upload what you have so far so that other NAM members and associates can look, we would be happy to help you work on these. :thumbsup:
EDIT
Quote from: trabman11 on February 23, 2014, 05:28:54 PM
&dance &dance ()what() WHA??? ()what() &dance &dance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTSIQPxA
I've never seen this project before, are their any plans for it?
That video is from 2011, as you can see. It was part of the now-defunct RAM project. But as I said, those kinds things are still plausible for long-term development.
Quote from: Indiana Joe on February 23, 2014, 05:30:04 PM
Eggman: you do realize that Willy has already released color-corrected textures for lots? Also, I think art might have meant the textures on the bridge models themselves. I agree that they could use some more detail and weathering, but if you upload what you have so far so that other NAM members and associates can look, we would be happy to help you work on these. :thumbsup:
I will be putting the bridges out into the developmental field once I have determined the IIDs and the exemplar IDs for the bridges. Unfortunately I will be busy for a few days so I have been kind of rushing through the modeling and textures to make a complete set. There are still some issues that need to be sorted out.
Unfortunately also my texture library is quite limited so it will be a while before I can create and map the correct textures since they have not been created yet.
Edit: I forgot to mention. With the new method I am now using you only have to change the Rail Texture FSH in the bridge file so that you don't have to re-BAT the whole model. Much like the way Willy textured the over-truss bridge in the current RRW in the NAM32 installation.
I am quite aware about what Art128 was mentioning and I have the same feelings. The textures do need some more work. I will be addressing this in the coming days.
-eggman121
Hey guys, I have one railway bridge model that I would like to finish and release soon. I really don't know anything about bridge modelling and I know you've gone way forward since that tutorial available here. SO my question would be, is there a possibility of me having your support in planning how to and what to do with this model so that it can finally see the light of game?
How should I divide it? Should the span be central part? I have no idea.
https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1115x532q90/713/prv3jpg.jpg (https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1115x532q90/713/prv3jpg.jpg)
Quote from: Vlasky on February 23, 2014, 09:58:37 PM
Hey guys, I have one railway bridge model that I would like to finish and release soon. I really don't know anything about bridge modelling and I know you've gone way forward since that tutorial available here. SO my question would be, is there a possibility of me having your support in planning how to and what to do with this model so that it can finally see the light of game?
How should I divide it? Should the span be central part? I have no idea.
https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1115x532q90/713/prv3jpg.jpg (https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1115x532q90/713/prv3jpg.jpg)
Sorry for the late reply but I think the bridge you have there may require RULs to implement correctly in game, something that I'm not proficient with yet. In terms of dividing it should be in 1 tile segments with each piece centered at X=0 Y=0. Nice modeling though :thumbsup:
There is a wealth of information on the SC4 Wiki and some of the forums.
Here are some of the Tutorials:
http://www.wiki.sc4devotion.com/index.php?title=Tutorial:Bridge_Modeling
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=930.0
Here is another STR or RRW1 bridge I have made in my limited free time this week.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSteelBeamBridge_zps52f88f97.jpg&hash=937be29ac21af0d2a1d49e4ba02f8422b1e15ab9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/SteelBeamBridge_zps52f88f97.jpg.html)
I think I'm getting the hang of this.
-eggman121
Very nice eggman! &apls you're getting better and better!
Just a curiosity regarding your wires...are you planning to "wirifying" also RRW1?
This bridge is nice ;)
Just be careful about the repetition of the textures
Quote from: eggman121 on February 28, 2014, 02:02:08 AM
Quote from: Vlasky on February 23, 2014, 09:58:37 PM
...
...
Here is another STR or RRW1 bridge I have made in my limited free time this week.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSteelBeamBridge_zps52f88f97.jpg&hash=937be29ac21af0d2a1d49e4ba02f8422b1e15ab9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/SteelBeamBridge_zps52f88f97.jpg.html)
I think I'm getting the hang of this.
-eggman121
Nice bridge buddy!! :thumbsup:
But the parapet or curb must continue to the edge of the slope. ;)
Quote from: Gugu3 on February 28, 2014, 02:06:34 AM
Just a curiosity regarding your wires...are you planning to "wirifying" also RRW1?
Thanks Gugu3. Yes wires will come to the STR or RRW-1. It's just a matter of when.
Quote from: Girafe on February 28, 2014, 02:57:37 AM
This bridge is nice ;)
Just be careful about the repetition of the textures
Thanks. Do you mean repetition on the bridge itself or across the various bridges I have made? I have quite a limited texture library so that is something I need to address.
Quote from: vinlabsc3k on February 28, 2014, 04:44:31 AM
Nice bridge buddy!! :thumbsup:
But the parapet or curb must continue to the edge of the slope. ;)
Fixed.
Ok, until this point I have not shown a picture with a train traversing the bridge... until now.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSteelBeamwithTrain1_zps3e97745a.jpg&hash=68cbb9a508c8f38d42ba620e367368983e717429) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/SteelBeamwithTrain1_zps3e97745a.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSteelBeamwithTrain2_zpsb006a9e9.jpg&hash=a0b5da81bcdaf278415ed1bc446afbdf47cbb470) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/SteelBeamwithTrain2_zpsb006a9e9.jpg.html)
Luckily the pathing is not so hard for the bridges since it it in a straight line.
-eggman121
That's a whole step up from your last ones eggman. If that's still the rough draft, I can't even imagine the final version. &apls
Spectacular! I'm really excited about all the bridge variations for RRW. :thumbsup:
That bridge looks amazing! &apls
And thanks for the reply eggman!good to hear RRW1 is gonna be wiryified...don't really care about when as i know you're doing it in your spare time and whenever it's ready it's gonna be amazing &apls
Great work Stephen, I'm glad to see you're keeping this thread humming.
Meanwhile, I've ordered a new machine and I'm looking to get back online within the next two weeks.
Cheers
Willy
Welcome back, Willy! ;D
Eggman: CURSE YOU FOR BLOWING MY EYES OFF DUE TO HIGH AWESOMENESS LEVELS!!! (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy24%2Fnakayome%2Ficons%2Fahihihi.gif&hash=fa93679b0bb2bf5e7be7168c580f9607e8b1d7f6) este $%Grinno$% :D
Glad to see all these new bridges! I agree the textures still need some work, but you're off to a good start and getting better with each one. :thumbsup:
I just installed NAM32 and I seem to be missing a texture for STR ortho crossing road. I converted to dual track just to make the crossing for the time being, but when I get a chance I will go back and capture a snapshot.
Have not forgotten about wireing the Long 45 degree Long curve. More fun :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2F45CurveLeft_zps8c205b6e.jpg&hash=4c157dec660185b01ae5a13b21ff074461b2e574) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/45CurveLeft_zps8c205b6e.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2F45CurveWye_zpsd279cbb7.jpg&hash=0ca407b177f04eb6924f6a623c41cf28a433c4e6) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/45CurveWye_zpsd279cbb7.jpg.html)
Lucky I can use these models and the exemplar template to wire up the orthogonal and Diagonal Turnouts. It took all 16 unique exemplars to wire this curve apart from the middle which only takes two which is the flipped and non-flipped.
enjoy!
-eggman121
Lovely progress. I feel like the light outside the tunnel is not so far anymore. ;)
Lovely progress!seems like your project is going on quite smoothly :thumbsup:
Any progress on the bridge side?I mean bridge/wires/shadows problems
Cheers
Guglielmo
Quote from: art128 on March 07, 2014, 06:37:45 AM
Lovely progress. I feel like the light outside the tunnel is not so far anymore. ;)
You mean a tunnel with cantenaries? ;D
Good work Eggman. Beautiful!
Good job, so expected mod ::)
&apls &apls
Mmmm... delicious. :D
Quote from: eggman121 on March 07, 2014, 04:04:44 AM
Have not forgotten about wireing the Long 45 degree Long curve. More fun :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2F45CurveLeft_zps8c205b6e.jpg&hash=4c157dec660185b01ae5a13b21ff074461b2e574) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/45CurveLeft_zps8c205b6e.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2F45CurveWye_zpsd279cbb7.jpg&hash=0ca407b177f04eb6924f6a623c41cf28a433c4e6) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/45CurveWye_zpsd279cbb7.jpg.html)
Lucky I can use these models and the exemplar template to wire up the orthogonal and Diagonal Turnouts. It took all 16 unique exemplars to wire this curve apart from the middle which only takes two which is the flipped and non-flipped.
enjoy!
-eggman121
HOLLY COW!!
What can I say, what hasn't been said so far...... ?
Keeps the eggs rolling...... ;D
(Please, forgive my bad humour)
Thanks for the comments guys :thumbsup:. I don't have a lot of spare time at the moment due to university study and work but I was able to get this one out.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWoodenTrestle2_zps5220423a.jpg&hash=0cc6bbf90917a49a9523e13c4b3219a0c22cd815) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WoodenTrestle2_zps5220423a.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FWoodenTrestle1_zpsc1c28131.jpg&hash=52cff61e21b0c1ccbed2b274d2feba03ffd4dd1c) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/WoodenTrestle1_zpsc1c28131.jpg.html)
This one is a wooden trestle bridge found on many former branch lines in country Victoria. These bridges use to be towards the east of the state due to the abundance of timber and to curtail the cost of railway construction.
enjoy
-eggman121
Veeeeery nice bridge indeed! &apls
this mod is sure shaping up to something great... :thumbsup: add VDK's train sets and its practically complete... ::) hope it get s all finished in a well rounded fashion before life catches up... anticipation for the meantime :satisfied:
Lovely work eggman &apls
Beautiful work. What we(I) have been wanting for a long time now is a BETTER more realistic transition piece from Elevated Rail (Maxis) to Elevated Rail.
dyoungyn
Simply amazing, eggman121, simply amazing. &dance
Thank you for this mod!
I like the textures.
Now I want to create a bigger freight rail yard. Can I use the base textures of the RRW to create a texture pack for lotting purposes (similar to the NCD railyard textures)?
Greetings
Fantozzi
Quote from: fantozzi on May 09, 2014, 01:55:13 PM
Thank you for this mod!
I like the textures.
Now I want to create a bigger freight rail yard. Can I use the base textures of the RRW to create a texture pack for lotting purposes (similar to the NCD railyard textures)?
Greetings
Fantozzi
Hello Fantozzi
I'm exploring the ways to make textures to make a freight yard since this is an addition I want in the game. But if you want to make something quick you could always use the base texture of
0x263d2004 (Straight section DTR) in the lot support file of the RRW setup in NAM 32 and use the minicurves to make a realistic looking railyard. Otherwise the textures for the minicurves are in
RealRailway_Networks_DTR.dat and
RealRailway_Networks_STR.dat of your RRW installation if you wanted to make these textures into a texture pack for lotting. Mind you there are other textures in the
RealRailway_LotSupport.dat file so if you are confident with
Ilives reader you can look and see if any of those textures suit.
I think that just using the minicurves to make your railyard switches will be good enough but if you want to make these into textures for lotting I would ask
Willy / Swordmaster first. They are his textures after all.
-eggman121
Where to get those Amazing props? :)
I mean mostly the wired catenary. Thx alot.
QuoteI think that just using the minicurves to make your railyard switches will be good enough but if you want to make these into textures for lotting I would ask Willy / Swordmaster first. They are his textures after all.
If I remember correctly the intent was to build new lot textures as needed - so it would be left mostly up to other people if they felt the need to fill in gaps if Willy wasn't able to. I think there's a style guide kicking about somewhere.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on May 21, 2014, 03:21:19 AM
QuoteI think that just using the minicurves to make your railyard switches will be good enough but if you want to make these into textures for lotting I would ask Willy / Swordmaster first. They are his textures after all.
If I remember correctly the intent was to build new lot textures as needed - so it would be left mostly up to other people if they felt the need to fill in gaps if Willy wasn't able to. I think there's a style guide kicking about somewhere.
That would be the case, to the best of my knowledge at least. Anyone creating RRW-based textures for lots would be more than welcome to do so w/o needing to ask for permission and would very much reduce Willy's headache levels whenever he gets back around on a more regular basis ;)
Quote from: noahclem on May 21, 2014, 04:24:16 PM
That would be the case, to the best of my knowledge at least. Anyone creating RRW-based textures for lots would be more than welcome to do so w/o needing to ask for permission and would very much reduce Willy's headache levels whenever he gets back around on a more regular basis ;)
I think that is a fair point. There is a fine line between infringing on peoples work and making content available for Lotters. Maybe the mini-curve textures could be placed in the RealRailway_LotSupport.dat or another external file for the use by railway Lotters to use but this is just me thinking out allowed.
In terms of the Catenaries I am looking at a redesign due to the fact that there are a lot of exemplars which due to the inherent complexity is creating many headaches on my side. I think that before I go fully blown into the intricacies of the switches and curves that I should look at simplifying the wires so they are more easy to place onto the applicable curves/ switches.
-eggman121
The only issue with simply copying the mini-curves into the LotSupport file is that the colour space shifts slightly with lot textures and network textures. It is unimaginably annoying, but nothing we can do about it.
Here's what Willy himself recommends doing (http://community.simtropolis.com/topic/58986-question-about-puzzle-piece-textures/?p=1400893) when changing textures from transit to lot. (I've found it's not quite perfect; but I think it really depends on your monitor and color settings)
The problem is that you really need the separate pieces of the textures. Separate gravel, rail, sleeper texture layers. The original work material. When I asked, Willy said he'd be happy to share these once he has things back up and running.
Though originally intended for BAT I found Gascooker's calibration method (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=5229.msg165896#msg165896) delivers a near perfect match for transit vs. LE textures as well.
Thanks for all the feedback in terms of the texture shading. Will give it a go when I have a chance.
In terms of catenaries its time to switch tracks.... $%Grinno$%
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMinCurve_A2_1_zps66603475.jpg&hash=eb8d2ff96456f6cb97e9ad31290b6b1a89c4b119) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/MinCurve_A2_1_zps66603475.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMinCurve_A2_2_zps08ddded7.jpg&hash=ea02950bb8d6847e87ee59c46cb1964150496a38) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/MinCurve_A2_2_zps08ddded7.jpg.html)
Just starting to do some MiniCurve Turnouts and this is only the start. There is a lot more to come.
I'm going to do some assignments now but I will be back in a week or so.
-eggman121
Edit: Thanks for the KP :thumbsup:
Simply stunning :o This has to be one of the most eagerly awaited custom content projects of this time :thumbsup:
Quote from: noahclem on June 01, 2014, 05:05:48 PM
Simply stunning :o This has to be one of the most eagerly awaited custom content projects of this time :thumbsup:
I can't wait to finish it off and present it to the Simcity4 Community ;D. But it is going to take a while. We are talking about placing hundreds or thousands of props and exemplars here for the finished product.
Here is some pictures of the switches with trains running underneath.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTrainMiniTurnout_1_zpsa9695228.jpg&hash=a22d973db290ed735df68ef72b4192a837b73c2a) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/TrainMiniTurnout_1_zpsa9695228.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTrainMiniTurnout_2_zpse48ebf8d.jpg&hash=e608d705dc6684a44597dcd3da612b84b01e3a71) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/TrainMiniTurnout_2_zpse48ebf8d.jpg.html)
Many thanks to Vester for his AE Skyliner Train.
-eggman121
Fantastic work!
I think the KP will not be the last for you. So prepare.
Quote from: eggman121 on June 01, 2014, 08:31:38 PM
Quote from: noahclem on June 01, 2014, 05:05:48 PM
Simply stunning :o This has to be one of the most eagerly awaited custom content projects of this time :thumbsup:
I can't wait to finish it off and present it to the Simcity4 Community ;D. But it is going to take a while. We are talking about placing hundreds or thousands of props and exemplars here for the finished product.
Here is some pictures of the switches with trains running underneath.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTrainMiniTurnout_1_zpsa9695228.jpg&hash=a22d973db290ed735df68ef72b4192a837b73c2a) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/TrainMiniTurnout_1_zpsa9695228.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FTrainMiniTurnout_2_zpse48ebf8d.jpg&hash=e608d705dc6684a44597dcd3da612b84b01e3a71) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/TrainMiniTurnout_2_zpse48ebf8d.jpg.html)
Many thanks to Vester for his AE Skyliner Train.
-eggman121
I'm willing to wait for something like I expect the finished product of this to be--not that I wouldn't be opposed to reviewing files still in a developmental state ;) Congrats on a well-deserved KP :)
This is just amazing! &apls
eggman121, You are a true artist when it comes to bridges. &apls I need to get these for my cities. I wonder what one would look like with Vester's new passenger train mods on it. :thumbsup:
Thanks for the kind words everyone :thumbsup: I really appreciate it ;D
I have been taking the new wires to new heights now :D
Orthogonal
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FOrthogonal1Elevated_zpsa19a2208.jpg&hash=7aff15bf9e8de81601df9db23de4d66f0b7ecd55) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Orthogonal1Elevated_zpsa19a2208.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FOrthogonal2Elevated_zps06360b65.jpg&hash=90b9adc3f3bb4a24de665816980c8f8db5669e17) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Orthogonal2Elevated_zps06360b65.jpg.html)
Diagonal
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDiagonal1Elevated_zps45a7e3a9.jpg&hash=7e55235be5d2f749aa94b8410329c212b6bbeb64) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Diagonal1Elevated_zps45a7e3a9.jpg.html)
Long Curve 45 Degrees
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FLongCurve1Elevated_zpscffad361.jpg&hash=0b74d5bf300fb7252116d4bbe1c4ba06eb4f469f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/LongCurve1Elevated_zpscffad361.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FLongCurve2Elevated_zps91f30a17.jpg&hash=79e8ca7afadffcb18e812f16798666c3881a7da8) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/LongCurve2Elevated_zps91f30a17.jpg.html)
Many thanks to Uki Sim and art128 for the poles! Now I won't be placing wire on the elevated switches for this type of viaduct but I will place wires on all the requisite crossings. This Definitely includes the crossing of the various networks and there will be another wire style that will work with the other ground wires.
-eggman121
Arghghhhghhghgggg
Sorry, I was just cleaning the drool from my keyboard. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Really, I can't wait for the day it will be released. ;D
OMG :P
Ooh man, that is just spectacular. &apls
Who needs a highway when we have this! &apls &apls
Thanks for all the kind words everyone :thumbsup:
Here is the Long curve with a Train passing over...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FLongCurve3Elevated_zps4bd3b5a3.jpg&hash=72e609f26cf06bdc8bb282eaacf81b9e23d1925e) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/LongCurve3Elevated_zps4bd3b5a3.jpg.html)
This is Vester's AE Skyliner Train that I'm using.
Thanks again for your kind words $%Grinno$%
-eggman121
Looking great!
Are the viaduct textures part of the next RRW or did you download them elsewhere?
Quote from: IBBubba on June 03, 2014, 04:18:19 PM
eggman121, You are a true artist when it comes to bridges. &apls I need to get these for my cities. I wonder what one would look like with Vester's new passenger train mods on it. :thumbsup:
Quote from: eggman121 on June 05, 2014, 03:08:08 PM
This is Vester's AE Skyliner Train that I'm using.
I guess he is talking about the North American Passenger Cars (http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=3116) and Engines (http://sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=3114).
Love that big smooth curve :thumbsup:
I am so looking forward to see the viaduct be updated with either new textures or with puzzle pieces that has that bigger radius.
Hope both is going to happen. Willy please come back.
Have a few spots on the viaducts, that I would love to be updated.
Should I post images of these ?
Viaduct textures are from here (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/29279-rum-for-rrw/) guys.
I'm sure working on the viaduct pieces to meet with new standards has always been on Willy's long term to-do list. But the 3D modeling is a ton of work. So think along the lines of RRW version 3 or 4, or later.
Great work on the viaducts &apls
Woah, that looks so great! I have been waiting for something like this for a long time. Good to see you're still continuing this project. :thumbsup:
Those look absolutely fantastic! I'm a massive fan of railway arches and viaducts and these are stunning, they have a wonderful Victorian look, with a modern addition of course. The brickwork detail is very nice indeed.
Maybe it's not as exciting as 3D stuff, but here's what I've been working on this week.
Doing something similar with Willy's original textures shouldn't be a problem.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUdmbc3Q.jpg&hash=19edb8edc81d81bf8eb3f1d4ad59f9defa3fe141)
that smooth transition between concrete and ballast is nice, I like it. :)
Quote from: Indiana Joe on June 06, 2014, 09:28:30 PM
Maybe it's not as exciting as 3D stuff, but here's what I've been working on this week.
Doing something similar with Willy's original textures shouldn't be a problem.
*snip*
I would really, really, really, really be interested in some overlay textures like that!!!
It looks very nice &apls I think we could really use these types of textures to make existing lots RRW-friendly. That said, I can tell you Willy planned yard to be 3 tracks per tile so I hope you'll consider making overlays to that spec as well :)
Will this be replacing the existing ncd textures? If so, awesome, we have instant RRW-compatible rail yards now!
Indeed it's very nice :thumbsup:
ohhs and ahhhs!...
it is looking all so promising good, its getting very exciting, anticipating good things here... &apls :thumbsup:
it will make for great basis for VDK's new N. America train sets to run on... :)
Very nice Indiana Joe :thumbsup: .
Lack of Railyards and other RRW lots are probably the main problem for users uptaking the RRW so it is good that you have been able to make a railyard. Can't wait for seaports!
Keep it up
-eggman121
Quote from: Indiana Joe on June 06, 2014, 09:28:30 PM
Maybe it's not as exciting as 3D stuff, but here's what I've been working on this week.
Doing something similar with Willy's original textures shouldn't be a problem.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Ft398osd.jpg&hash=f914092e1eb4f4b6d0c77b714fede8ece3b3e82c)
Stunning & mind boggling!!! &apls
Here are some Pics of the MiniTurnout B2. I have some free time now so watch this space!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMiniCurve_Train_B2_1_zps0371137e.jpg&hash=d1cecd08f466453379dc46e9143a0e5ee3000abe) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/MiniCurve_Train_B2_1_zps0371137e.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMiniCurve_Train_B2_2_zps411bf4b5.jpg&hash=a88024b3ca87ae14602bcc5ac174677b90b779e5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/MiniCurve_Train_B2_2_zps411bf4b5.jpg.html)
-eggman121
that's absolutely fantastic.
I love the overhead line end.
Awesome progress! Any word on those bridges you were working on earlier eggman?
Even more ooooh's and aaaahhhhh's!
This thread is becoming very repetitive: you show us an image, we all go ooohhh and aaaahhhh!
But because we all like a moment of awe once in a while I'd say: at all means continue! ()flower()
Quote from: FrankU on June 10, 2014, 06:11:48 AM
Even more ooooh's and aaaahhhhh's!
This thread is becoming very repetitive: you show us an image, we all go ooohhh and aaaahhhh!
But because we all like a moment of awe once in a while I'd say: at all means continue! ()flower()
My sentiments exactly!
Apologies for my absence, dear friends. I've been dividing up my time between music and a girl ;D
Quote from: Indiana Joe on June 06, 2014, 09:28:30 PM
Maybe it's not as exciting as 3D stuff, but here's what I've been working on this week.
Doing something similar with Willy's original textures shouldn't be a problem.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Ft398osd.jpg&hash=f914092e1eb4f4b6d0c77b714fede8ece3b3e82c)
Fantastic Matt! &apls That looks exactly like I had it in mind back in the day. I've nicked someone's outdated graphics card to put in my old machine so I hope I can finally retrieve all the stuff on there! Hang on. . .
For the record, I also wish to state for everyone that my textures or anything else I made is free to use and adapt as per the good old modding community standards. :)
Not sure when I'll get back to this, so don't hold your breath; but then, it looks like rail modding is in good hands :thumbsup:
Cheers
Willy
*rubbing eyes*
...
WILLY! &dance
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 10, 2014, 11:15:56 AM
Apologies for my absence, dear friends. I've been dividing up my time between music and a girl ;D
For a reason like that we don't need an apology! :D
Welcome back Willy. It is always good to see you drop in every now and than. Hope all is going well!
Quote from: Simcoug on June 10, 2014, 05:56:15 AM
Awesome progress! Any word on those bridges you were working on earlier eggman?
Hello Simcoug
Here are the bridges that I have made so far side by side:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FAllBridges310514_zps3de3ef7f.jpg&hash=8659f71b0df10f1dc069dc05a4f92734aea30223) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/AllBridges310514_zps3de3ef7f.jpg.html)
I have some more to come. The reason why I have not been showing bridges is because it can be quite hard to make a bridge and some of the bridges still have some errors. But stay tuned since I will be making some longer span bridges!
-eggman121
Ermahgerd it's Willeh!!
Quote from: Swordmaster on June 10, 2014, 11:15:56 AM
Apologies for my absence, dear friends. I've been dividing up my time between music and a girl ;D
Two things I always wish I was spending more time on $%Grinno$%
Take your time with the files, I have plenty to work on.
Quote from: noahclem on June 07, 2014, 05:53:19 AM
3 tracks per tile
Track center spacing in those textures is 4 meters, which is pretty much the lower limit of standard spacing. 3 tracks is awkward to transition into from dual-track rail, but I might make multiple widths. It varies of course; depending on what purposes the yard serves and what kinds of cars and equipment are being used.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on June 07, 2014, 05:56:17 AM
Will this be replacing the existing ncd textures? If so, awesome, we have instant RRW-compatible rail yards now!
That's a negative. NCD made a butt load of textures that I don't want to re-create. The change in track spacing and curve radius would mess it up too. I am creating an entirely new pack of modular lots, which will support multiple RRW texture packs.
EDIT: keep going on those bridges Stephen!
Quote from: Indiana Joe on June 10, 2014, 02:12:48 PM
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on June 07, 2014, 05:56:17 AM
Will this be replacing the existing ncd textures? If so, awesome, we have instant RRW-compatible rail yards now!
That's a negative. NCD made a butt load of textures that I don't want to re-create. The change in track spacing and curve radius would mess it up too. I am creating an entirely new pack of modular lots, which will support multiple RRW texture packs.
EDIT: keep going on those bridges Stephen!
To be honest, it wouldn't make a difference if spacing was revised, as they're cosmetic pieces. I'm assuming you're doing a new complete set that will pretty much cover 99% of all possibilities currently available with NCD's textures?
Could not help myself :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSTRWyeJunction_zps65b87b3c.jpg&hash=7264b90b5862a80feda4cb462a969ff458f69711) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/STRWyeJunction_zps65b87b3c.jpg.html)
Finally Wires have come to STR or RRW 1. Don't know if that is the new nomenclature yet but I guess only time will tell.
-eggman121
You are beyond every kind of help we could offer. :D
Awe again! &apls and :thumbsup:
I love the progress. That STR Wye worries me a little, a real train would wipe those posts out of existence. They're too close. Two seperate posts in the center with lengthened arms may work better..
The rail bridges you've made look fabulous! I love that through-truss bridge, but I'd make it look more rusty because pretty much every rail bridge I've seen in RL looks old and rusty since they were built over fifty years ago. I'd also love to see an STR version of that truss bridge; that would look neat!
One suggestion I'd have is to have thicker pylons on some of your bridges to make them look more stout. Currently, they just look way too flimsy and thin right now.
Keep up the great work on the bridges and catenaries.
And even more ohhhh`s and aahhhh`s and also a couple of woooow`s
Love everything so far and that bit after bit comes together for a complete RRW set.Especialy love the freight yard. &hlp
Woooaahhh!!!!!!!
There, a single exclamation to sum it all up! :D
Those posts on the y split are really close to the tracks indeed. Stellar job with the bridges though! :thumbsup:
Thanks for all the feedback.
I guess more Ohh's and aaahhh's on the catenaries front.
Just trying to get the easier stuff out of the way before I get to more of the complicated stuff. The script I wrote for gmax is working a treat now so making wires is not so labor intensive ()stsfd() .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSTRtoDTRLong_zpsa2d0f3a7.jpg&hash=c1a1d0ecb763e23140a15119cfc6faeb235fb301) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/STRtoDTRLong_zpsa2d0f3a7.jpg.html)
DTR to STR Long Transition
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDTRCrossOver_zps2fce403f.jpg&hash=3704cf566144e806f451c5bb0cc8e57c9cacb77f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/DTRCrossOver_zps2fce403f.jpg.html)
DTR crossover
In terms of the bridges I will need to re-texture and change some geometry so they are more stable. If anyone has any suggestions to improve the bridges that I have shown I'm all ears!
Also I have changed the poles on the STR Y split so train drivers need not worry about hitting poles.
-eggman121
beautiful!
A shame there isn't X crossover like in real life. :)
Yep, that's pretty sweet all right! &apls
As for the bridges, besides the obvious texturing needs, imho the wooden trestle STR bridge (third from bottom up) could be improved in terms of construction, i.e. more diagonal beams. I'm no engineer but it just looks a bit shaky. Maybe it's also because it appears not to be attached to land?! &Thk/(
Also, I think it'd be neat to have the stone arch bridge for STR as well. Looking forward to see how they'll turn out! :thumbsup:
Speaking of the stone arch bridge I have gone to the trouble of re-texturing it. I think someone a while ago asked if they could see my bridges with Vester's North American Trains on them.
Have not forgotten about that so here they are...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStoneArchTrain1_zps2c995aac.jpg&hash=83f7d04880e8cb27d302e36db0f809fcacd951cb) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StoneArchTrain1_zps2c995aac.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStoneArchTrain2_zpsc09a87cf.jpg&hash=84bd6f642aa9eb66fbafe238937ee97846d3d346) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StoneArchTrain2_zpsc09a87cf.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStoneArchTrain3_zps36849d7d.jpg&hash=b9ae09abc575d39445b823e2f338d96f405599c1) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StoneArchTrain3_zps36849d7d.jpg.html)
I have made the stone arch to be a little more rustic compared to the other Stone Arch bridge which was a bit plain.
Wondering on other peoples thoughts.
-eggman121
Still looks too pristine though it is an improvement.
I think you've got it about right for the texture... but it needs a bit more weathering.
Quote from: Shadow Assassin on July 01, 2014, 04:54:31 AM
Still looks too pristine though it is an improvement.
I think you've got it about right for the texture... but it needs a bit more weathering.
Thanks SA. I have taken upon your advice and weathered the texture a little. I'm quite pleased with the results. Looks more like the bluestone look that I have been hoping for.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStoneArchRetexture1_zps89082cd7.jpg&hash=6691e264e0431ab3984c50daf132fab5536ca8e9) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StoneArchRetexture1_zps89082cd7.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStoneArchRetexture2_zps95772adb.jpg&hash=af37a2d9219a1c40f864b65f388fb9f7bb7cd49c) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StoneArchRetexture2_zps95772adb.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FStoneArchRetexture3_zps040ef264.jpg&hash=03aa74c5bc659d2e0c1e9f5f40a7b48198f80ec7) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/StoneArchRetexture3_zps040ef264.jpg.html)
I open to comments but I think I'm nearly there.
-eggman121
Very nice Eggman! &apls
Bridge's nice but we can see the texture is very repetitive. :/
Agreed. The weathering is nice, the repetition not so much.
Great update to the textures and nice bridge for that matter.
Is the texture made up of just one map or several maps ?
What I do to break up repetition, is use several maps, with different aphlas and different U and V repetition.
Set up the size of the UVW mapping box.
Let me see if I can find some jpgs I did to show it.
Found some old graphics.
As stated in the post above, I start of by add UVW-map the object.
For most parts in would be just a wall for each object.
This UVW-map box will cover all of the wall.
Instead of just using a bitmap under diffuse colors you pick composite:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi941.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad252%2Fvester71%2Fmisc%2FComposite1.jpg&hash=e181ccb7209e0ae38929b476210e16a91e338187)
Here is an example of a concrete material:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2FDiv%2FComposite.jpg&hash=142fdc5f4485b05d838694332dff69610fc87e6e)
A brick material:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2FDiv%2FComposite3.jpg&hash=c25ba89e3dedc854d65c7dfe7f0fb9384b07d1a2)
The second brick texture (layer 2) is darken in the output, as shown in the top right corner. With the gradient in the alpha you get a nice gradient to the material.
Layer 3 add some green (moss or grass) to the bottom of the walls.
Layer 4 add dirt, to break up the repetition.
For both layer 3+4, the tiling of diffuse colormap should be different from the tiling of the brick textures. The tiling of alpha can be what ever you like it to be. Play around with the setting until you get a good result.
Lets say you get a good result with having the brick texture (layer 1+2) cover 4x4 meters. The UVW-map is 20x20x20, then the tiling for the brick will be 5x5. I then use gradient in the alpha to align/rotate the textures right. At times I add the gradient to a extra layer as diffuse. This layer can be turned on and off.
Hope this make sense. Just ask if you have any questions.
Hello Vester
Did you use gmax or 3DsMax for the texturing? I don't have the composite option in my installation of gmax and can't get access to 3dsMax
I can only use multi-material.
Thanks for the infomation though.
-eggman121
It is 3ds Max I use for modelling and texturing.
Thanks for your speedy response Vester.
Well I only have gmax and blender to play with so I may try texturing the model in blender and reimporting it into the reader. I have other options such as multi material but I don't know if that will work.
I will do some experimenting today.
-eggman121
I just had an idea today...
And this is what I came up with:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F250aa38dfe3ea51269f104d027901505.png&hash=bc889df09e4f491c46deafe2873e55c4d97a2fa9)
Unfortunately I don't know much (=nothing) about RULing, so I couldn't just try to implement it myself :/
EDIT:
I've started making some more textures for this (I hate it only suggesting stuff I'd like to have in the game without contributing anything %wrd)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F0f5d09aca805ee9ea842e39d87d41d08.png&hash=6d0ef8c74f0e291fafe07dd5c8c6f26db1aaafb2)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fafd01a78b2edc64ecef9291f99f0c259.png&hash=f1e3488dbf0ca85001919482a5e8ee94649fbf62)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fb6b57a920095f6b27fced2e09c41ad6b.png&hash=3030e47473bdab2194daa9955f1ec838191f58c5)
(I know they have to be split up into single tiles)
I think more will follow soon because I can reuse STR switches for that.
Very nice textures isii94 :thumbsup:
Although the textures should be more symmetrical since I don't think dual tile rail networks are going to be introduced in the scope of the RRW project. If you want to get involved you could always try making Triple Track Rail (TTR) and Quad Track Rail (QTR) textures since they are planned for future iterations of the RRW.
I applaud you for taking the initiative to make the textures since my philosophy is that you should always have a go at making content for the game before asking for it from other members. Keep up the good work :thumbsup:
@Vester
Ok, so since I'm a university student I have managed to get a student copy of 3DsMax 2015 and have been able to successfully import my gmax models by a) converting them to MD3 format, 2) Open them in blender, 3) save them as FBX and 4) import them into 3DsMax.
Now the problem I am having is that I can't figure out how to texture the various model parts with the composite method that you described to me. I'm just wondering if you could elaborate on the method to texture the models since the texturing is a different kettle of fish to the type I am used to on gmax. I may have further questions on LODing and rendering but at this stage I am only interested on the texturing. Any help would be appreciated ;D .
-eggman121
Quote from: isii94 on July 04, 2014, 02:00:00 AM
I just had an idea today...
Definitely good to get hands on. Takes lots of initiative to go from an onlooker to a contributor. :thumbsup:
First question, before you go any further, is where are you going with your project? Gotta have a plan. So far I don't see any practical applications for your combinations of dual and single track rail. And as Stephen (Eggman) pointed out, network textures should be symmetrical, as you must be able to rotate and mirror them.
Now, if you want to make lot textures, that's a whole different story.
Hey eggman, all this work on Railroad System will be released in NAM 33? I've figured out how to make a functional Railroad System, I was looking to your screenshots and I'm amazed :>
&apls Well done everyone! &apls &apls Well done!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC7om6n8kDU&feature=player_detailpage
I have an idea.
Could we make the RRW as flexible as the MIS? In that way, we could construct flying junctions and some crazy rail interchanges... [img]http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y24/nakayome/icons/ahihihi.gif/[img]
Well, I'll explain my idea:
I thought of realistic 4 track mainlines (such as East Coast Main Line in the UK) which actually wouldn't fit on one tile. So I imagined two adjacent stretches of DTR could snap together (similar to the old RHW when you had to draw two adjacent stretches of ANT which would then convert to RHW 4) to create a QTR (not one one tile but on two as the ones on one tile look a bit crammed and not very realistic for mainlines).
This would have be a layout like Up slow - Up fast on the left tile and Down fast - Down slow on the right tile (mirrored for RHD). To create junctions I had the idea to do this the way it is done since RHW 4 (if I remember that correctly) where you can split a MIS off the road by simply dragging it out: This would mean you could split a STR off by dragging it out. The integration if switches would be fairly easy as the slow track is in the centre of the tile as it is on STR.
To get from the fast track to such a switch you'd have to build this switch I showed in my previous post, just like it is done in reality.
For stations the slow track should make a shift to the outer edge of the tile to have platforms between the tracks in the centre of the tile. If you want a small station for the slow tracks only you can just put that texture on your lot and place small platforms next to them.
This would also make special two tile catenaries easier to create because these are separate textures and therefore different transit lots.
So maybe I'm just going to learn a bit about RULing and try implementing at least some if that myself.
And maybe at some point an auto-generated flyover could cross over the main tracks from a switch on the slow tracks to allow turning right (left for RHD).
I don't think Willy ever made up his mind on whether QTR would be one-tile with a bit of overhang or a two-tile setup as you've shown. The two-tile approach has the obvious benefit of increased capacity while one-tile would have at best a marginally increased capacity using DIPs. I think either approach would work well but the one-tile would be a little easier to implement.
As far as making more complicated rail interchanges possible the biggest need would be the 7.5m draggable elevated RRW Willy had started on. He seemed to have made some pretty good progress on it, including STR, but making models to fit RRW minicurves, in addition to everything else, makes that a pretty big project. Hopefully next time he shows up he'll share a couple pics of it.
Quote from: noahclem on July 06, 2014, 09:05:38 AM
[...]but making models to fit RRW minicurves, in addition to everything else, makes that a pretty big project.[...]
Personally, I wouldn't need viaduct curves, as I use viaducts (both road and rail) almost exclusively for overpasses, and my impression is that most people use them that way, too. It would be a pity if such projects fail because of advanced models (and the lack thereof) in preference to basic functionality.
Quote from: memo on July 06, 2014, 09:34:51 AM
Personally, I wouldn't need viaduct curves, as I use viaducts (both road and rail) almost exclusively for overpasses, and my impression is that most people use them that way, too. It would be a pity if such projects fail because of advanced models (and the lack thereof) in preference to basic functionality.
That is my impression also. I don't think there are many RL instances where switches or turnouts are elevated. Bridges for rail already have there problems due to the rolling stock going over it and the forces that come with it.
Anyway speaking of turnouts here is my progress on the B2 long turnout wired up...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FB2TurnoutPP_zps9751921b.jpg&hash=053ee67fa5ee31261ef5c8ba5a1811b84b0aa4b8) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/B2TurnoutPP_zps9751921b.jpg.html)
By no means complete but almost there.
-eggman121
I'm liking what I'm seeing. :)
This is beautiful eggman! &apls
&hlp
Amazing, can't wait for NAM 33
Beautiful work &apls
I'd agree on the elevated rail stuff. A very basic set of L1 pieces would be a huge improvement. And unless on-slope pieces were still able to placed adjacent to the network being crossed in a draggable setup I'd prefer it be puzzle piece-based. A Flex piece could work for a crossing many different kinds of networks with out having a huge number of conventional puzzle pieces.
On all high traffic railways I know of, turnouts are grade separated at interchanges so that two busy tracks do not cross, so I agree that viaduct curves are realistic. I think L1 STR viaduct pieces would work well.
I had another problem with LHD paths not showing up. This problem applied to STR as the paths are missing in "RealRailway_LHD.dat". There is an easy fix though:
Open RealRailway_Networks_STR.dat in ilives Reader and select all path files (this can be done by the filter tool). Then clone these files incrementing the first digit of the Instance by 2. Save the file and you're done.
----------
And for something completely different:
Is there an ID range I could use for this QTR project? I don't want it conflicting with any other things.
Quote from: isii94 on July 11, 2014, 07:21:16 PM
I had another problem with LHD paths not showing up. This problem applied to STR as the paths are missing in "RealRailway_LHD.dat". There is an easy fix though:
Open RealRailway_Networks_STR.dat in ilives Reader and select all path files (this can be done by the filter tool). Then clone these files incrementing the first digit of the Instance by 2. Save the file and you're done.
----------
And for something completely different:
Is there an ID range I could use for this QTR project? I don't want it conflicting with any other things.
There was a patch for that too floating around somewhere. Glad you figured it out.
The NAM team likes to keep a tight hold on its transit IID ranges so that things don't get disorganized; if you PM one of the senior members they can give you a range within the experimental range. The first step I think would be to learn RUL-2 code if you plan on starting an override network from scratch. :thumbsup: (Good luck; I haven't had the determination to go very far with it yet)
Quote from: Indiana Joe on July 11, 2014, 07:51:09 PM
There was a patch for that too floating around somewhere.
Here. https://db.tt/eYYUaVUG
Those catenaries, are they made automatically when you drag rail with the RRW? Or is this some downloaded version the modder is using in the pictures?
Quote from: builder on July 12, 2014, 02:38:15 PM
Those catenaries, are they made automatically when you drag rail with the RRW? Or is this some downloaded version the modder is using in the pictures?
The catenaries are an extra to the RRW but are still under development. There is no release package available nor is there a timeline for completion.
I'm just using pictures to keep people in the loop of current development.
Thanks for your interest in my work.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on July 12, 2014, 03:10:02 PM
Quote from: builder on July 12, 2014, 02:38:15 PM
Those catenaries, are they made automatically when you drag rail with the RRW? Or is this some downloaded version the modder is using in the pictures?
The catenaries are an extra to the RRW but are still under development. There is no release package available nor is there a timeline for completion.
I'm just using pictures to keep people in the loop of current development.
Thanks for your interest in my work.
-eggman121
I gotta say, your work looks very good!
Quote from: builder on July 13, 2014, 05:10:36 AM
I gotta say, your work looks very good!
Thanks. Its quite a bit of work but I am battling along with this project.
To give a status update here is what is possible with the current progress....
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FCatenariesComplicatedSetup_zps965b3ccf.jpg&hash=dab04a23e031c39b0a899b59e9d99cbf47091eee) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/CatenariesComplicatedSetup_zps965b3ccf.jpg.html)
Yep. Soon complex setups with catenaries will be possible. Can you name the puzzle pieces in this setup? $%Grinno$%
the puzzle pieces are proving to be real pains but one by one I am slowly completing them.
-eggman121
Wonderful! &apls
I am exited. I hope you'll release a beta version before the full release. I'll be glad to test it. :D
What's the status on Uki's work? Do you still get in touch with him about the overhead lines? He hasn't posted news on his website for a while.
A small update from me:
Today I got the reply from Tarkus for a IID range, so I started creating the models.
When trying to test my progress I ran into a problem:
In the reader everything looks fine
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2Fd98e133a1dba2884da1802ff44e3bc3d.png&hash=27185684ff6af679a5421feff30be7309946bd4e) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/d98e133a1dba2884da1802ff44e3bc3d.png)
When attempting to drag the network, I get the right preview (the T intersection is the "starter piece")
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2Fa76c242d5a24a124488930476fb976af.png&hash=7ec6cfdfb65611a717c793df7c6ecb0f90f48083) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/a76c242d5a24a124488930476fb976af.png)
And then I get this weird result
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2F7322f6e1b2811a25a7d3a5d4b6cedab8.png&hash=b92315371ae4d7299dc5e3694d5fafafe82da53b) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/7322f6e1b2811a25a7d3a5d4b6cedab8.png)
Trains can drive on that, though
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2Fcda4c1ed4614b3b8e02b180039319f7e.png&hash=f46320da48fddb1ae9f02ce0e313281c050e58ca) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/cda4c1ed4614b3b8e02b180039319f7e.png)
----
Other than that I started creating textures for some smooth curves:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2Ff572ab45509636a0fe639a59b760a1e1.png&hash=3499f1f36c6ee3a5098499dcbc0f00c313076c8f) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/f572ab45509636a0fe639a59b760a1e1.png) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2F2c8a2534e1f5a9f89835272565f04ec2.png&hash=1e564cf9ee442e2317486975007d362c09860353) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/2c8a2534e1f5a9f89835272565f04ec2.png) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2F7c66432ec79423777aa4ab6ace850105.png&hash=19f0267764e030dbf6ce9b17afebc4e8970fe53b) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/7c66432ec79423777aa4ab6ace850105.png)
I think the problem is that the preview has the correct IIDs for the texture but the base has not. I'd double check your IIDs for the draggable set textures.
It looks like you need an alpha channel on your textures as well unless the texture set is the End rail texture which I can see in one of your images. Also the RRW is model based so I would also check that your textures are on S3Ds.
Nice work by the way :thumbsup:
-eggman121
The textures do have an alpha channel which was automatically created by by multifshview. After that I had to assign the FSH files to the right S3D files.
The .dat file looks like that right now:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2F641cbffb478c643a9d66b931dad547b8.png&hash=3f14ebab1578758a0933fa26d8455e840a3ef021) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/641cbffb478c643a9d66b931dad547b8.png)
Quote from: isii94 on July 17, 2014, 03:22:40 PM
And then I get this weird result
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2F7322f6e1b2811a25a7d3a5d4b6cedab8.png&hash=b92315371ae4d7299dc5e3694d5fafafe82da53b) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/7322f6e1b2811a25a7d3a5d4b6cedab8.png)
I am impressed by your way of diving into modding! A Karma point is well-deserved. :thumbsup:
The preview textures are taken directly from the FSH, so the actual problem is with your models. Perhaps the models are corrupt (you could try copying them from somewhere else and adjust the material IID) – though, I have a hunch it might be caused by the settings in the Mats section (perhaps share a screenshot of those). I think I have seen a similar issue before, but I don't remember what exactly caused it (Edit: the "texturing" flag, possibly).
Regarding your textures, I noticed that the spacing between tracks in uneven. Is the spacing between the two center tracks the same as for double-track rail (DTR)? I would recommend to adopt the minimum spacing of DTR at least because Swordmaster determined it to be the minimum possible distance and made huge efforts in adjusting the spacing of DTR for the RRW.
The fast tracks (in the centre) are basically a DTR texture moved halfway across the tile border. The outer track is in the centre of the tile for STR paths to be re-used.
The Mats section looks like this on the zoom 5 tile:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2F695bcca76dc7395e094b9f300226d448.png&hash=6e0bdbfeb6be2da1e2e8f4707c4b6e2cd4c52ba1) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/695bcca76dc7395e094b9f300226d448.png)
Edit: The models were copied from the straight DTR piece.
If you select the material ID in the table and scroll down, you'll see the material settings. Make sure to select the 'texturing' flag.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F9981bbb099865e4213fc094afd32e3d4.png&hash=7bc9c5793865e2a84da6a3853325fbb01be89721)
Edit: You might have to adjust the other settings, too. Here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=11023.msg393724#msg393724) are a few details about that.
Thanks, memo, it worked \o/
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2F18355fec0aeb13191ead933e95a7023e.png&hash=8a84dc6a3601e2e2ad7061e87ace50f9b79d558a) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/18355fec0aeb13191ead933e95a7023e.png)
Every time I scrolled down before, the settings were disabled (not having the texture selected, of course...)
Edit: This is how you build it right now:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2Fae579fdd7b1891b2034c6ff81f086dca.png&hash=e4da6532a66a3770575a29f8a59c781482a3f16a) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/ae579fdd7b1891b2034c6ff81f086dca.png)
So, if I understand correctly, you've created a texture override using INRULs (?) and basically created a new kind of pseudo express network with express lines in the middle and branch/local lines on the side?!?
That's an impressive start, even if I can see immediate problems with implementation. Nice work; a K-point well deserved.
Quote from: APSMS on July 18, 2014, 10:24:11 PM
So, if I understand correctly, you've created a texture override using INRULs (?) and basically created a new kind of pseudo express network with express lines in the middle and branch/local lines on the side?!?
Well, measurements aside, an INRUL-based approach at inducing an override isn't unheard of (hint hint, EDRI and FlexRamps), but even at the most prototypical levels, they come in handy if you don't know how to induce overrides using false intersections (AKA starters).
Actually, looking a page back, it's a starter based off of a "true" intersection? If so, that's unheard of; the false ones are based off of and unconventional flag configurations, but I've not heard of a starter made from a true intersection, testing or otherwise.
Also, I've never heard of a NAM newcomer tackling RUL2 right from the very beginning.
Quote from: isii94 on July 17, 2014, 03:22:40 PM
Other than that I started creating textures for some smooth curves:
There are ways to implement these in-game, using either puzzle pieces (not recommended long-term, but worth trying) or using INRUL patterns; thing is, one method has a tutorial and the other does not. However, there'd be a problem with implementing the 45-degree curve: RealRailway disables shared-tile overlapping Dual Track Rail, and you've designed it to use a shared-tile diagonal, so you may wanna rethink that.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on July 18, 2014, 10:49:24 PM
Actually, looking a page back, it's a starter based off of a "true" intersection? If so, that's unheard of; the false ones are based off of and unconventional flag configurations, but I've not heard of a starter made from a true intersection, testing or otherwise.
Back in 2006, this sort of method was actually how
qurlix set up the original "XRHW" prototype (present day RHW-8S and later 10S, as the specs changed), and the initial setups that
jplumbley and I did for the TLA-5, 7, and OWR-5 used the same system. However, the difference in that case was that every tile of the network was a literal intersection, rather than the override simply initiating the override. It was believed at that time that there needed to be a physical connection between the tiles in order to get the game to read a multi-tile network built from a composite of smaller networks (which actually rendered these early prototypes completely intolerant to slopes), though
memo fortunately disproved it. This whole discussion can actually be seen in the old RHW development thread at ST.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on July 18, 2014, 10:49:24 PM
Also, I've never heard of a NAM newcomer tackling RUL2 right from the very beginning.
Indeed, it is a very rare occurrence, and very neat to see. You're really off to a running start,
isii94, so my metaphorical hat is off to you. :thumbsup:
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on July 18, 2014, 11:13:10 PM
It was believed at that time that there needed to be a physical connection between the tiles in order to get the game to read a multi-tile network built from a composite of smaller networks (which actually rendered these early prototypes completely intolerant to slopes), though memo fortunately disproved it. This whole discussion can actually be seen in the old RHW development thread at ST.
Really? I can't even remember that. $%Grinno$% I should browse through the old threads more often.
In the initial version of draggable GLR, the T intersection and 90 corner actually acted as starters, too, as those intersections don't exist for elevated rail. Though, it seems to have been disabled since.
Quote from: memo on July 18, 2014, 11:43:01 PM
Quote from: Tarkus on July 18, 2014, 11:13:10 PM
It was believed at that time that there needed to be a physical connection between the tiles in order to get the game to read a multi-tile network built from a composite of smaller networks (which actually rendered these early prototypes completely intolerant to slopes), though memo fortunately disproved it. This whole discussion can actually be seen in the old RHW development thread at ST.
Really? I can't even remember that. $%Grinno$% I should browse through the old threads more often.
Page 47. http://community.simtropolis.com/topic/4381-real-highway-rhw-development-and-support/page-47
Quote from: APSMS on July 18, 2014, 10:24:11 PM
So, if I understand correctly, you've created a texture override using INRULs (?) and basically created a new kind of pseudo express network with express lines in the middle and branch/local lines on the side?!?
Well, it's not INRUL based but RUL2. And yes, that's what I'm creating. Maybe I'll make switches automatically to be STR (DTR from one side would be kind of pointless).
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on July 18, 2014, 10:49:24 PM
There are ways to implement these in-game, using either puzzle pieces (not recommended long-term, but worth trying) or using INRUL patterns; thing is, one method has a tutorial and the other does not. However, there'd be a problem with implementing the 45-degree curve: RealRailway disables shared-tile overlapping Dual Track Rail, and you've designed it to use a shared-tile diagonal, so you may wanna rethink that.
So that would mean defining a texture for 1,3,1,3 (or is it 3,1,3,1?) flags again in the INRUL and when this texture occurs, automatically overriding the adjacent diagonals using RUL 2? (I don't know yet, though, how dragging multiple adjacent shared-tile diagonals could be prevented, RUL2 with a 0,0,0,0,0,0 override I suppose?)
Quote from: isii94 on July 19, 2014, 04:11:39 AM
(I don't know yet, though, how dragging multiple adjacent shared-tile diagonals could be prevented, RUL2 with a 0,0,0,0,0,0 override I suppose?)
Probably done by removing the INRUL entries entirely. After all, RRW uses a completely rewritten set of INRULs, so who knows what got removed?
Progress of today...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fthumbnails%2Fe8f7c1c8ab2fb6cd8c2d53d401c6ced0.png&hash=fb7c26aec346c808379b651afd0aaace01f04589) (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/e8f7c1c8ab2fb6cd8c2d53d401c6ced0.png)
I have a question... could this method be applied to roads?
Which method? Do you mean shared-tile diagonals or T intersections as starters?
yup.. the shared tile.. also the intersection.. just everything lol
Quote from: cmdp123789 on July 19, 2014, 07:53:25 PM
yup.. the shared tile.. also the intersection.. just everything lol
Shared-tile's already mostly possible with a lot non-rail networks already, primarily Road and One Way Road. However, it's a somewhat awkward way of implementing an override network because of how generally awkward its network bends are (you know, how you go from orthogonal to diagonal?), and, in a way, how generally awkward it is to intersect with other networks, even with itself. This doesn't mean it's completely useless; two NWM networks actually use shared-tile diagonals, though the implementation for both could be changed to something else in future developments.
Also, using a T-intersection to induce an override for an override network is just too impractical; you'd be getting networks you don't want in all of the wrong places. This is why we use starters: to get the network you want in all the right places.
Very nice work Isabella :thumbsup: . I'm quite impressed that you have been able to dive into RUL2 code so quickly. The only suggestion I could make about the texture is that the rails should be at equidistant spacing at 4.5m from the centre of the track.
Since I'm making some catenaries for the RRW I would be delighted to make some poles and wires for your work once you have finalised the design.
I'm looking forward to seeing more. Keep it up, you are doing a fantastic job. $%Grinno$%
-eggman121
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on July 19, 2014, 08:03:57 PM
Also, using a T-intersection to induce an override for an override network is just too impractical; you'd be getting networks you don't want in all of the wrong places. This is why we use starters: to get the network you want in all the right places.
In the case of Rail, a setup like two Ts going together like that is virtually useless from a functional perspective with the default setup for that network. Traffic can't actually use it, and you'd never see a railroad do that in real life. However, with a Road network of some sort, someone might actually build an intersection like that, which complicates things on that front. Unless, of course, we simply tell those people "no" to building intersections of that sort.
-Alex
Quote from: eggman121 on July 19, 2014, 09:41:04 PM
Very nice work Isabella :thumbsup: . I'm quite impressed that you have been able to dive into RUL2 code so quickly. The only suggestion I could make about the texture is that the rails should be at equidistant spacing at 4.5m from the centre of the track.
Since I'm making some catenaries for the RRW I would be delighted to make some poles and wires for your work once you have finalised the design.
I'm looking forward to seeing more. Keep it up, you are doing a fantastic job. $%Grinno$%
-eggman121
Thanks :) (INRUL was actually harder to understand than RUL2...)
The distance between the central rails is in fact 4.5m. There are some reasons why I'd actually like to keep the distance between the fast and slow tracks greater than 4.5m:
- It will be easier to create switch textures as existing STR textures can be reused
- There's enough space for signalling the fast tracks without automata cutting through the models
- It looks less like a waste of space at the edge of the tile $%Grinno$%
I'm just another one in a large crowd when I applaud your amazing progress in learning RUL code Isabella. &apls
Just as an FYI, the quadruple track rail project (as well as TTR) has already been started as a part of the RealRailway mod by Willy (Swordmaster). He's been away from development for several months, and it's hard to tell what's been done already been done and whatnot.
The way you're implementing things now makes sense from your perspective. But I promise you that the transit modders working off of 10 years of collective experience have their reasons for the advice they give. To keep things all up to current NAM standards, QTR will need to use INRUL starters to allow the network to intersect other override networks through current RUL code standards.
The difference in track spacing won't really save any work. While STR paths can be re-used on straight sections, it won't work on curves and such if you think about the geometry. The network should really be designed to work mainly alongside standard DTR rather than STR (which is why a single-tile, overhanging QTR network was originally considered for the RRW). And finally, the setup is not particularly realistic by real life track standards, where standard track spacing is maintained so that infrastructure components can be easily re-used.
So keep going in your experiments, but keep in mind that there are certain standards that the project will need to be adjusted to before inclusion in the NAM's RUL files. Switching now will only save work. :thumbsup:
Please don't hesitate to ask for any help in your project, or the best way to implement things with future development in mind.
So you're saying that I should change the whole thing to be based on one tile?
I actually had RHW 4 in mind when thinking about that project and the transition from RHW 2 to RHW 4 also includes a lane shift (which could be smoothed out more on the railway network)
STR just makes more sense to me beacause IMO it seems kind of pointless to branch a (clearly visible) bi-directional network off a uni-directional track. (I was talking about branches/switches all the time)
The gap between the fast and the slow tracks was inspired by the East Coast Main Line (UK) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple_track#mediaviewer/File:Otterington_railway_station_MMB_01.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple_track#mediaviewer/File:Otterington_railway_station_MMB_01.jpg)
When I have figured out how to make INRUL starters, I can change that, of course ^^
By now I've added to RUL2:
- A T intersection inducing the override (will be removed later)
- If the neighbouring tile along the network is overridden, the current tile will be overridden, too
- If a rail line is drawn next to a overridden stretch on the correct side, it will form the opposite side
- If a diagonal tile is next to a shared-tile diagonal tile, it will change to 4 track railway
In the INRUL I've added the capability of drawing shared-tile diagonals which automatically convert to the override
Quote from: isii94 on July 20, 2014, 03:30:07 PM
So you're saying that I should change the whole thing to be based on one tile?
I actually had RHW 4 in mind when thinking about that project and the transition from RHW 2 to RHW 4 also includes a lane shift (which could be smoothed out more on the railway network)
I actually have some angst against the idea of a single-tile Quad Track Rail; for capacity purposes and because it'd have more breathing room for texturing, I've always envisioned a two-tile QTR instead of a single-tile QTR.
As of the spacing on the tracks and whether each track should be the same space or not, I don't think it matters if you can manage to retexture everything to be one specification or the other. As of reusing textures between STR and your version of QTR, it doesn't really reuse textures in the sense the game can reuse them, but rather how the texture maker can reuse them; in the end, it's still different textures to the game's eyes.
Also, starters are traditionally implemented using RUL1, not INRUL. Even if the rail-rail T-crossing is useless, there's still a possibility that it can screw up sections of rail that it's not supposed to override if it were a part of an INRUL pattern instead. There were RRW track junctions/switches that used part of the same pattern (adjacent Rail-Rail T-crossings), which could cause INRUL interference: if you drew out a track switch, you could accidentally draw out QTR instead (it could be avoided, but I wouldn't wanna risk it). There's actually some dev notes on INRUL Interference scattered in our dev discussions so I'd recommend avoiding the INRUL-based starter and instead using a RUL1 starter in the long run.
Count me among those who favor the idea of a dual-tile implementation. It'd add a new layer of functional differentiation, which as someone who likes new features to really add to simulation, is something I'm a fan of doing when possible. Since you have picked up RUL2 so quickly, I'd suspect the process of making a starter would also come easily to you.
-Alex
If waffled a bit on the issue but I'm sold on 2-tile QTR too ::) Really impressive work, btw. Wish I caught onto things so quickly :D
I'm also sold on the dual tile implementation of QTR. My only question is that how will this fit into the current DTR and STR we have at the moment in terms of turnouts and track geometry?
I will take a look myself at the mainline shown by Isabella to see how the track changes from the QTR she is designing to the networks we have at the moment.
I did float a proposal with Willy a while ago about the pathing of the track. As you know the STR is bi-directionally pathed. I have the view that if you path the QTR track in both directions than use PPs with the pathing desired than the track could become more flexible with the track having multiple configurations along the same network. The PPs could have paths that can mimic either Dual DTR, TTR with an STR line next to it or other configurations. This would open up many possibilities for many track configurations.
-eggman121
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.overclock.net%2Ff%2Ffc%2F494x624px-LL-fcabc9c0_3080169_74297fd36ef0024ba4ef150db36eae70.png&hash=7a60e0d759244f2b1209361d2686b1b31f0641e3)
I'm fine with either, though cosmetically I like the dual-tile implementation more as they're more indicative of real life in some parts of the network here (there have been cases where an extra track is run on the outside of a pair which already has gantry)
By the way, this is what excites me more, the possibility of being able to do these kinds of platforms:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fe6195c1bab6d0b49dc7108daa6f1f816.jpg&hash=a97b3069360abdb12c2c6bd20c90ed04b361f8d8)
About track spacing, I think signaling on multiple tracks are done by overhead signals than in between tracks.
I was concerned about stations on TTR and QTR before, but I like that picture above a lot
A question about the Quad Track Rail System -
If you were to put say (i don't know a default SC4 passenger train station) next to the quad tracks, would the station only be able to server on one side of the two tiles like with other systems (such as default bus stops to some NWM roads/aves?) or would the stations be able to sever both sides of the track even though to track sits on two tiles?
Quote from: trabman11 on July 22, 2014, 08:48:40 PM
A question about the Quad Track Rail System -
If you were to put say (i don't know a default SC4 passenger train station) next to the quad tracks, would the station only be able to server on one side of the two tiles like with other systems (such as default bus stops to some NWM roads/aves?) or would the stations be able to sever both sides of the track even though to track sits on two tiles?
It's the same as all other networks that are wider than one tile because transit stations can only serve adjacent tiles.
----
And a status update: Right now I'm getting a major headache creating my first puzzle piece...
Quote from: isii94 on July 22, 2014, 09:07:13 PM
And a status update: Right now I'm getting a major headache creating my first puzzle piece...
If it's an issue with the code, you can follow up with a similar discussion that's been happening on the RHW Thread or you can share the code here. If it's something else, you may want to share the .dat file (textures/S3Ds/paths/exemplars/EffDir) so we can take a peek and see what's wrong.
It's just... Puzzle pieces are so much work :-\ So far I've just created the textures and I'm applying them to the models
I think I'll mostly stick to INRUL patterns as you just need textures and a few lines of code for them (and a lot of paper for drawing tiles and writing down flags, as well as a lot of gestures for all the rotations). There are of course a few exceptions like crossover switches that can't be drawn.
Does this sound weird for someone who has just started transit modding?
Hey guys I just installed the NAM on my Mac and the RRW isn't in there :(
As the RRW is in Alpha/Beta stage, you'll need to select it as an option under custom installation. Be sure to also select the Rail WRC and other rail stuff (but NOT any texture overrides) from further down in the menu.
BTW, this question is better asked in the NAM Support thread. This is mostly a development forum, especially since the main support provider/developer Swordmaster is on hiatus.
Quote from: APSMS on July 29, 2014, 09:22:07 AM
As the RRW is in Alpha/Beta stage, you'll need to select it as an option under custom installation. Be sure to also select the Rail WRC and other rail stuff (but NOT any texture overrides) from further down in the menu.
BTW, this question is better asked in the NAM Support thread. This is mostly a development forum, especially since the main support provider/developer Swordmaster is on hiatus.
Thanks APSMS :thumbsup:
Fantastic work here! Like everyone else I'm impressed by your learning efforts Isabella and I'm curious to see where this is going. I hope to be getting back into SC4 as the summer dwindles down, at least in the texturing part of it, so let me know if you want any help on that front.
Cheers
Willy
I'm back, and impressed for the new development of this project!! :thumbsup:
Isabella, you are amazing &apls but I think the four tracks should be equidistant. &mmm
Are there any plans to release a texture pack?
As it stands now, basically all the rail yard plops are broken since there is no texture support for 3 and 4 track rails. The few textures included in the install only cover the most simple things for retexturing simple stations and the like.
Even a beta release would be great since we could create to our hearts content errors will disappear when RRW goes into final release.
I'll just quote the first post of this topic
QuoteHow about lot textures and lot support? Will there be compatible railyard textures?
Supporting existing content has always been a primary concern for the developers, and full compatibility is aimed for. Maxis lot textures are included in the mod. Third-party textures are not covered; their conversion to RRW is the responsibility of their respective creators. This can be done in cooperation with the RRW developers if so desired. It is likely that there will be a compatible railyard project coming up from the mod's developers.
If you meant that, it's up to the creator of the original textures.
Not to worry folks - I'm still on this. Moreover, RRW-compatible railyards are still in the works, but TTR and QTR are a bit of a precursor to that (not to mention finishing STR and DTR).
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on August 05, 2014, 02:02:22 PM
Not to worry folks - I'm still on this. Moreover, RRW-compatible railyards are still in the works, but TTR and QTR are a bit of a precursor to that (not to mention finishing STR and DTR).
Cheers
Willy
Thanks for making my day :thumbsup:
Quote from: isii94 on July 20, 2014, 01:14:04 PM
Quote from: eggman121 on July 19, 2014, 09:41:04 PM
Very nice work Isabella :thumbsup: . I'm quite impressed that you have been able to dive into RUL2 code so quickly. The only suggestion I could make about the texture is that the rails should be at equidistant spacing at 4.5m from the centre of the track.
Since I'm making some catenaries for the RRW I would be delighted to make some poles and wires for your work once you have finalised the design.
I'm looking forward to seeing more. Keep it up, you are doing a fantastic job. $%Grinno$%
-eggman121
Thanks :) (INRUL was actually harder to understand than RUL2...)
The distance between the central rails is in fact 4.5m. There are some reasons why I'd actually like to keep the distance between the fast and slow tracks greater than 4.5m:
- It will be easier to create switch textures as existing STR textures can be reused
- There's enough space for signalling the fast tracks without automata cutting through the models
- It looks less like a waste of space at the edge of the tile $%Grinno$%
I've given all this some thought and I tend to agree here. If we decide to go with a 2-tile network for QTR (my initial stance was a 1-tiler, but I'm coming around, too), this fast+slow track setup seems best. I think it's also the most realistic representation of a true QTR network, contrary to the one where two lines simply run parallel. Many DTR lines that are expanded later on to QTR employ this layout.
Then again, I'm with SA regarding "why not do both". I've always had an open-mind towards draggability of a number of variations to certain track setups--mostly minimal implementations without crosslinking. Ideally, I'd have flexible transitions between the mainline, siding, and railyard components of the network. In RL, these things don't begin or end in orderly fashion, as you will notice during a brief glance over Google earth.
I'll get back to this particular topic in some rather distant future.
Quote from: Indiana Joe on July 20, 2014, 02:31:56 PM
Just as an FYI, the quadruple track rail project (as well as TTR) has already been started as a part of the RealRailway mod by Willy (Swordmaster). He's been away from development for several months, and it's hard to tell what's been done already been done and whatnot.
Well, nothing had been done on TTR or QTR except for these two previews.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fttr-preview.jpg&hash=a9c64324fb5bf933daa58b825ea349b03f99cf73) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.majhost.com%2Fgallery%2Fswm666%2FRRW%2Fqtr_preview.jpg&hash=9ae07a545d5d4a14bda434ded258686751eab28b)
Quote from: isii94 on July 22, 2014, 10:59:14 PM
I think I'll mostly stick to INRUL patterns as you just need textures and a few lines of code for them (and a lot of paper for drawing tiles and writing down flags, as well as a lot of gestures for all the rotations). There are of course a few exceptions like crossover switches that can't be drawn.
Does this sound weird for someone who has just started transit modding?
I hope you're using memo's tools to make the INRUL rotations automatically!
Cheers
Willy
Firstly, everything is looking great. Good work on all the effort so far. &apls
I look forward to the release.
Any chance of an elevated RRW at some point, maybe 7.5m?
Quote from: thebagleboy on August 08, 2014, 06:28:18 PM
<snip>
Any chance of an elevated RRW at some point, maybe 7.5m?
There's already a first release (the beta/alpha). However, may I amend thebagleboy's statement to say
draggable viaducts?
I know better than to ask, but I couldn't help myself. ;D
Nice work, Isabella. I seem to be slowly marching over to the two-tile camp as well, though as Willy said, some single-tile QTR would be really nice, too.
Quote from: APSMS on August 09, 2014, 12:40:06 AM
Nice work, Isabella. I seem to be slowly marching over to the two-tile camp as well, though as Willy said, some single-tile QTR would be really nice, too.
QTR would make more sense to do as a single-tile setup because you can already do dual-tile quad-track rail by just dragging out two parallel lines of DTR.
I'd actually like to have some single tile stuff, too. However, I'd use this only for short stretches like sidings or stations with rails for overtaking. This means most of that would be better represented as lot textures and some cosmetic pieces.
Quote from: compdude787 on August 09, 2014, 09:04:26 AMQTR would make more sense to do as a single-tile setup because you can already do dual-tile quad-track rail by just dragging out two parallel lines of DTR.
So why don't you just drag two adjacent stretches of RHW 2 when you want to have 4 lanes?
From what I've seen so far, there are basically two types of QTR. You can either have up-up-down-down or up-down-up-down, like RHW 4 or 2xRHW 2. For the up-down-up-down you can indeed use two parallel DTR lines (or even swap one with GHSR), but for up-up-down-down a new type of override network is required.
Quote from: isii94 on August 09, 2014, 09:27:09 AM
I'd actually like to have some single tile stuff, too. However, I'd use this only for short stretches like sidings or stations with rails for overtaking. This means most of that would be better represented as lot textures and some cosmetic pieces.
Quote from: compdude787 on August 09, 2014, 09:04:26 AMQTR would make more sense to do as a single-tile setup because you can already do dual-tile quad-track rail by just dragging out two parallel lines of DTR.
So why don't you just drag two adjacent stretches of RHW 2 when you want to have 4 lanes?
From what I've seen so far, there are basically two types of QTR. You can either have up-up-down-down or up-down-up-down, like RHW 4 or 2xRHW 2. For the up-down-up-down you can indeed use two parallel DTR lines (or even swap one with GHSR), but for up-up-down-down a new type of override network is required.
Oh, I see. I thought that QTR was essentially just a visual enhancement; I didn't realize it was the rail version of RHW-4 in terms of pathing.
Quote from: APSMS on August 09, 2014, 12:40:06 AM
Quote from: thebagleboy on August 08, 2014, 06:28:18 PM
<snip>
Any chance of an elevated RRW at some point, maybe 7.5m?
There's already a first release (the beta/alpha).
There is? I didn't know that.
Thankyou ;D
Who gets it?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fa9215a1f40ed11b8ecd74655a103573d.jpg&hash=2c5bdff7a07078e6d73418cb7fc719268d8f5398)
(Intentionally disabled the grid ;D)
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: thebagleboy on August 15, 2014, 10:21:52 PM
Quote from: APSMS on August 09, 2014, 12:40:06 AM
Quote from: thebagleboy on August 08, 2014, 06:28:18 PM
<snip>
Any chance of an elevated RRW at some point, maybe 7.5m?
There's already a first release (the beta/alpha).
There is? I didn't know that.
Thankyou ;D
We are working on the last missing pieces for the 15 meters:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2FBATs%2FRailviaducts%2FSwitchOrthoMax2_zps18cdb013.jpg&hash=ac955eb7b845a35ec0f54c8639ce748604e08aec)
EDIT: Replaced the link with an image.
Vester, you're linking to a private board.
Willy, I think at least one of them is FARR, right?
So there is a 7.5m rail? wow! Any pics?
Will there be a way to get from one track to another on the next tile over with the Viaduct-RRW? Because I have some Viaduct-Rail stations with more than one set of tracks, and if I can't run the lines next to each other, the station is basically useless.
Quote from: Swordmaster
Who gets it?
That looks like an ortho to diag with some FAR helping in the transition...
At least that is my guess... but in any case it looks smooth-a-licious :thumbsup:
No Matt, this is the ortho to diag :P
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F3563e968bcab4ee4a183ef5011d41716.jpg&hash=f87e84e4656ea077e86012c07d41367ae1d333a2)
Maybe you should compare this with a puzzle piece (top is the familiar 90° curve PP, bottom is. . . something else ;D):
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fef7305eb5934ba3513e135e8d1b50f79.jpg&hash=4a01a05ec912490dab94fe84a7f72653459b0579)
Quote from: mgb204 on August 25, 2014, 05:44:37 AM
Will there be a way to get from one track to another on the next tile over with the Viaduct-RRW? Because I have some Viaduct-Rail stations with more than one set of tracks, and if I can't run the lines next to each other, the station is basically useless.
I'll be able to answer this hopefully in the near future.
Cheers
Willy
So you somehow managed to get the curve created by placing two ortho-diag transitions next to each other a lot smoother? Awesome!
Quote from: Korot on August 27, 2014, 11:20:29 AM
So you somehow managed to get the curve created by placing two ortho-diag transitions next to each other a lot smoother? Awesome!
Are you sure it's just two 45-deg curves conjoined to each other and not more things conjoined? $%Grinno$%
so clever in your executions %confuso that it is difficult to put the finger on that 'new thingy' U did... ???
such a tease ()stsfd() ::)
my stab at the 90* bends are they are one piece and terrain friendly... :)
It looks to me like a 90° curve made of ortho-to-FAR-3 curves and FAR-3-to-diagonal curves, although it looks so much smoother than any 90° curve I've ever been able to build with those PPs. That implies that the PP Willy showed earlier on this page is a new version of the ortho-to-FAR-3 piece.
Whether I'm right or wrong, it all looks amazing! Great work, Willy, and it's great to see you back in action! :D
I'm gonna throw things off, but what's a puzzle piece?
(Also testing my new tablet.) :P
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on August 27, 2014, 08:02:58 PM
I'm gonna throw things off, but what's a puzzle piece?
(Also testing my new tablet.) :P
Lol, I can see a lot of new NAM users saying that in a couple of years when puzzle pieces are completely dead.
Gonna tease some more. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2F6c45dd8d1fca1d71885914cc3380e73e.jpg&hash=e3ae3410d41c3ccfc943fe78d15f015a0cb7c950)
Cheers
Willy
I am glad to see the development of RRW continuing.
Just hope that one day full catenaries set will be released with rail textures pack ::)
Edit: just see the last upadate of Willy, looks interesting even if the cross texture is not at my taste
This is like looking at one of Escher's drawing, you don't know which way is up or down, or anything.
More seriously, nice work. Though I agree with Antoine about the crossing texture. It feels too much of a rupture with the wonderful rail texture.
Thanks guys. In line with the roads, highways, and most everything else default in the NAM, they're North American textures, more specifically based on Oregon (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=45.444971,-122.628209&spn=0.000792,0.00123&t=k&z=20). But as always, the texturing is less than 1/4 of the work here. It's what's under the hood ;)
Cheers
Willy
My only objection to the crossing would be that I was under the impression that North American at-grade rails have combined concrete (whatchamacallits) so that drivers don't have two small bumps but one large one. It looks weird to have them separated like that.
But that compactness! and the draggability! I wonder how the dragging pattern is for these rails (different from their RAM configuration, I assume).
:thumbsup:
farr out!
:satisfied:
Nah, they don't always (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=45.503623,-122.654267&spn=0.000837,0.00142&t=k&z=20) turn it into one concrete deck. In fact I can think of some specific places nearby where I always am annoyed by having to go over two bumps.
And the fact that everything you're looking at will be draggable is even more remarkable than it looks. Willy, you're tearing apart the game's grid.
:party:
Haven't been active for a while and I'm catching up now with all these amazing progresses...Willy was that a sort of FAR2 and FAR3 draggable stuff??
Quote from: Gugu3 on August 31, 2014, 05:33:36 AM
Haven't been active for a while and I'm catching up now with all these amazing progresses...Willy was that a sort of FAR2 and FAR3 draggable stuff??
We have a winner! Finally someone mentioning FA2 ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fb59626753610cb447d0b3fc4ea7e22c6.jpg&hash=cc31b70b0a895d58f6e53273e8ee5c85d99bb3e7)
Cheers
Willy
Fantastic work Willy. I can't wait to play with them ;D
&apls
So awesome Willy!
Will the draggable FAR work for STR as well?
Excellent work with the FA2, that's "FAntastic"... :D :-[
The Y-Splitter doesn't have paths. In addition, while I cannot confirm this 100% having one in my city causes the game to lag when dragging or demolishing rail.
Quote from: Swordmaster on August 31, 2014, 06:06:51 AM
Quote from: Gugu3 on August 31, 2014, 05:33:36 AM
Haven't been active for a while and I'm catching up now with all these amazing progresses...Willy was that a sort of FAR2 and FAR3 draggable stuff??
We have a winner! Finally someone mentioning FA2 ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Fb59626753610cb447d0b3fc4ea7e22c6.jpg&hash=cc31b70b0a895d58f6e53273e8ee5c85d99bb3e7)
Cheers
Willy
Have I won something??? :P ;D ;D ;D ;D
Awesome :thumbsup:
One mind-boggling thing I see here is the ortho-to-FA2 and ortho-to-diagonal overlap onto the same tile. Will it really be possible to drag these curves so close together? ()what()
Quote from: Simcoug on August 31, 2014, 06:57:32 AM
&apls
So awesome Willy!
Will the draggable FAR work for STR as well?
It's planned. Don't pin me down on a time scale, though.
Quote from: Wiimeiser on September 01, 2014, 06:38:31 AM
The Y-Splitter doesn't have paths. In addition, while I cannot confirm this 100% having one in my city causes the game to lag when dragging or demolishing rail.
The LHD issues with the current RRW version are known, and will be tackled next release.
Quote from: Gugu3 on September 01, 2014, 09:18:40 AM
Have I won something??? :P ;D ;D ;D ;D
Yes, access to 1 (http://www.ld-host.de/uploads/images/928a589e8524f09f8f461bfa5098376f.jpg) secret picture. :party:
Quote from: c.p. on September 01, 2014, 10:29:04 AM
Awesome :thumbsup:
One mind-boggling thing I see here is the ortho-to-FA2 and ortho-to-diagonal overlap onto the same tile. Will it really be possible to drag these curves so close together? ()what()
Absolutely! Overhanging models, my friend ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ld-host.de%2Fuploads%2Fimages%2Ff82c97687bcca5ed28a54a50cd31e34e.jpg&hash=db58bddc4c11698e4e2ce80633324e58b43f1b56)
Cheers
Willy
Amazing work Willy &apls &apls And quite the surprise pic too :o
FARR-Diag crossings... sweet! %BUd%
Will FAR be able to cross FARR?
All of these fractional angle possibilities... the grid is on the ropes :D
Simply stunning Willy &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
I've been away from the game for over a year now and I am coming back and seeing all this amazing progress! SC4 Forever! I fear the day SimCity stops working because this game is more the communities than anything that was initially released 10 years ago! I can't WAIT to check this stuff out in my region!
From :o to &dd
Willy , eggman121 and others involved in that project ... hats off . I think that each one here can measure how much time and effort you're investing in this revolutionary and so sexy railway ( how strange it is to see this two words associated :P ) Mod . Don't hurry , but don't lose touch with each other either - and may RL don't take you away too early . It would be too cruel now we have seen that light . :satisfied:
&apls &apls &apls &apls
Cédric.
Woahhh!Amazing stuff is coming to town.Love the angled pieces and the textures in general.Can`t wait till they are finished,from now on i won`t use any heavy rails until the new ones are out :D
Besides that,i`m wondering if the new RRW pieces might be a bit more MMP friendly and if they can share their tiles with planted MMP`s?
However keep up the good work &apls and have a nice Weekend.
OMG!!!!!!! Great work guys. Its been so long sense I came back to see your work. :O
This thread has been quiet... too quiet...
So I have decided to liven it up a bit... Not RRW Related but you get the idea.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FRealHSR2Train_zps62bb1f3f.jpg&hash=4d5fb7405a181a0934c3030c0618e9c3c47fcb73) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RealHSR2Train_zps62bb1f3f.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FRealHSR1Train_zpseac643eb.jpg&hash=603a5b245bae3aee61fb15105cd78beb6245b23a) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RealHSR1Train_zpseac643eb.jpg.html)
Art128 Are you watching? $%Grinno$%
Should I continue with this project?
-eggman121
That looks excellent. Now I can't help but wonder, are the rails elevated? they seem off center from the tile on both angles.
The railbase is indeed elevated. It is the same height as the HSRP. This is to stop the shadows and to be consistent with the HSRP. I want to see if people like this approach before i continue.
eggman121
Ooh, that explains it then. I think that's a good idea. This will be an HSRP mod? I like it. Might want to add some details like fences, But I'm sure it's already on your list. :)
Yeah, that is pretty nice! The current HSR looks too futuristic, IMO. Normal high-speed rail is just a railroad that has high-speed trains and has catenaries.
Looking great!
Looks excellent &apls Is it 0.5m elevated? Seems like ground level might be optimal but that should be fine too, especially if changing requires much effort.
Quote from: noahclem on October 19, 2014, 05:27:53 AM
Looks excellent &apls Is it 0.5m elevated? Seems like ground level might be optimal but that should be fine too, especially if changing requires much effort.
The height of the ground level is actually 1.189m unfortunately. I also believe that It should be at ground level. I will see what I can do. A no shadows patch for the GHSR would be required though.
Thanks for all the kind words everybody :thumbsup:
-eggman121
Awesome!! &apls &apls &apls
I hope that the final release will be included in the new NAM!! :thumbsup:
Quote from: vinlabsc3k on October 19, 2014, 03:09:57 PM
Awesome!! &apls &apls &apls
I hope that the final release will be included in the new NAM!! :thumbsup:
If I recall correctly, they (the NAM team) said it would be added to the NAM in two versions as the focus of the next one wasn't on the RRW stuff yet.
I'd say I agree with that though. It's best to have a good, thoughtfully tested version of a mod before making it public. I'd personally hate to see this mod rushed so that it meets the next NAM release date. (not that there is one, "It will be released when it is ready" )
Quote from: art128 on October 19, 2014, 03:23:32 PM
If I recall correctly, they (the NAM team) said it would be added to the NAM in two versions as the focus of the next one wasn't on the RRW stuff yet.
I'd say I agree with that though. It's best to have a good, thoughtfully tested version of a mod before making it public. I'd personally hate to see this mod rushed so that it meets the next NAM release date. (not that there is one, "It will be released when it is ready" )
The last and only time a NAM was released with a release date (NAM 31.0) it was half baked and put the team under pressure to fix the issues. Much of the team at the moment have heavy RL so it is hard to quantify what will and will not go in the next NAM. The HSRP version I am making is piggybacking on top of the current HSRP at the moment. I will have to discuss further what direction the HSRP will take. At the moment I am just experimenting with ideas for what people would like in a future NAM beyond NAM 33.
Anyways here are some more pictures of the HSRP next to the RRW
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FRealHSRRRW1_zpsb1ff18a8.jpg&hash=4ef2277fb08f5306423793d4b965179bd0f79645) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RealHSRRRW1_zpsb1ff18a8.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FRealHSRRRW2_zpsb9847233.jpg&hash=005c12469241d93f6940c7ea158caa88c97be11d) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RealHSRRRW2_zpsb9847233.jpg.html)
Enjoy ()flower()
-eggman121
The ground HSRP looks great! It's looks very useful and would work nicely with the current elevated option (Japanese version).
That's amazing :thumbsup:
And you got rid of these white spots.
Have you replaced the models with the flat planes the RRW uses? Looks like the updates for most paths could even be done automatically by a script which replaces the 1.189 with 0... Then only the transitions would be left to be done manually
This is just amazing! &apls &apls &apls
Lovely work! the two networks really look good together. :)
EDIT - Have you tried Moonlight's security fences ? they might look good too.
Much better than the old "futuristic" HSRP! :thumbsup: Is it possible to add that fencing from your HSRP mod into ordinary railway?
Quote from: art128 on October 19, 2014, 03:23:32 PM
Quote from: vinlabsc3k on October 19, 2014, 03:09:57 PM
snip...
If I recall correctly, they (the NAM team) said it would be added to the NAM in two versions as the focus of the next one wasn't on the RRW stuff yet.
I'd say I agree with that though. It's best to have a good, thoughtfully tested version of a mod before making it public. I'd personally hate to see this mod rushed so that it meets the next NAM release date. (not that there is one, "It will be released when it is ready" )
For this I write hope and not want!! ;)
Will we have the fixed RRW in the next NAM?
-) Crossroads
-) Some EL-RRW pieces
-) And all overpasses and so on
I would be happy to see the catenaries for RRW
When I drag and build I would like to CHOOSE the rrw WITH catenaries or WITHOUT catenaries......Is that possible?
Quote from: DJSun1981 on October 20, 2014, 08:42:17 PM
I would be happy to see the catenaries for RRW
When I drag and build I would like to CHOOSE the rrw WITH catenaries or WITHOUT catenaries......Is that possible?
Catenaries probably won't feature in NAM 33 because of the inherent technicalities of the T21s and to answer your second question a RRW with cateneries and no catenaries is not possible because it would involve a SAM setup. Something which is not going to happen. The closest you will get is making the Monorail a HSRP network which will probably not feature until a few future revisions.
-eggman121
Hello,
I seem to have a problem with my trains driving on rails. When I tried to use the u-drive-it to test the track, I couldn't drive the train because the mission stopped at once when the timer hit zero. I don't have any skins on trains or anything, just the RRW. When I start a mission, I see one carriage, which I assume is the front wagon of the train, and it's not on the track but at a 90 degree angle from it.
Does anyone know what is happening?
Flexing my RUL2 skills :thumbsup:
http://youtu.be/zsZVbvbLtTg
-eggman121
Looks fantastic &apls The smooth ortho to ortho switch will be great to have back!
Quote from: noahclem on November 05, 2014, 01:03:48 AM
Looks fantastic &apls The smooth ortho to ortho switch will be great to have back!
Yeah I was always stumped why Willy's version did not make the cut for NAM32. I am sure that there where logistical reasons. That is why I made it again from scratch. I really wanted that switch so bad for my railways.
-eggman121
Sweet! :thumbsup:
Ok, that is an excellent addition! Number of times I've wanted to make such a switch.
Would it be possible to make a X switch like the one in the video? That would be excellent.
Great work eggman!
Lovely!
Is there any way to keep the functionality of rrw but modify the skin and texture?
For example, the rail catenary mod doesn't seem to work except on puzzle-pieces at the moment. Neither is it possible to change the underlying texture it seems.
Quote from: JonatanRaven on January 20, 2015, 07:54:28 AM
Is there any way to keep the functionality of rrw but modify the skin and texture?
For example, the rail catenary mod doesn't seem to work except on puzzle-pieces at the moment. Neither is it possible to change the underlying texture it seems.
The catenary Mod does not work since there was a Base change for the Draggable components.
The RUM for RRW has some support for plundere's catenaries.
It can be found here: http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/29279-rum-for-rrw/
-eggman121
Thanks, I'll try that one
Just to be sure... I downloaded Modular Railroad Crossing Props by jondor and try to use them with the Real Railway mod... then discovered that the real railway doesnt have compatibility with road street etc crossings? and also Modular Railroad Crossing Props by jondor CANNOT be used along Real Rail way? So, we need to build Rail apart from anything to avoid crossings?
Quote from: Zeratai on February 25, 2015, 05:03:39 PM
Just to be sure... I downloaded Modular Railroad Crossing Props by jondor and try to use them with the Real Railway mod... then discovered that the real railway doesnt have compatibility with road street etc crossings? and also Modular Railroad Crossing Props by jondor CANNOT be used along Real Rail way? So, we need to build Rail apart from anything to avoid crossings?
The at grade level crossings have not been fully updated to RRW standards and thus have limited support for these crossings. The RRW uses a new dedicated base thus the T21 props are not compatible with the current RRW since the T21s are all IID based.
If you would like me to fix the problem I guess I could re-base the T21s and make it compatible with the RRW.
Although the RRW was released in NAM32 the RRW is still considered to be in its early stages. With the lead developer away there won't be much change in the near future for now.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on February 25, 2015, 07:24:35 PM
Quote from: Zeratai on February 25, 2015, 05:03:39 PM
Just to be sure... I downloaded Modular Railroad Crossing Props by jondor and try to use them with the Real Railway mod... then discovered that the real railway doesnt have compatibility with road street etc crossings? and also Modular Railroad Crossing Props by jondor CANNOT be used along Real Rail way? So, we need to build Rail apart from anything to avoid crossings?
The at grade level crossings have not been fully updated to RRW standards and thus have limited support for these crossings. The RRW uses a new dedicated base thus the T21 props are not compatible with the current RRW since the T21s are all IID based.
If you would like me to fix the problem I guess I could re-base the T21s and make it compatible with the RRW.
Although the RRW was released in NAM32 the RRW is still considered to be in its early stages. With the lead developer away there won't be much change in the near future for now.
-eggman121
The crossings themselves have been completed by Rivit and are available in
this separate download (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/29279-rum-for-rrw/). Any railway props that have been made before the RRW came out won't work with it, as eggman said.
Quote from: eggman121 on February 25, 2015, 07:24:35 PM
If you would like me to fix the problem I guess I could re-base the T21s and make it compatible with the RRW.
If you do this I'd love a copy, somewhere in all my texturing I failed to even notice these weren't showing up with RRW, but please don't make them special for me, I could always update my own T21's if need be :).
Good to see you are still a live, Willy.
Been working on a few missing pieces for the viaduct to fit with the RRW:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fx9UafWi.jpg&hash=3164e192f34c8e69ccc000ec94d86dc7933e6ff7)
Hope Stephen (eggman121) is still up for it.
Hello everyone and thank you for keeping SC4 alive :)
I seem to have a problem with the new RRW texture from Rivit not showing up in game.
I removed any and all rail texture mods I had but that did not work.
I then removed all the plugins but the NAM 32 folders and Rivit's RUM 2 and still no new texture showing, only the original Maxis.
Also none of the wide radius and FAAR pieces have the new texture, also some of the elevated pieces still show the Maxis rail texture.
Any solutions would be greatly appreciated.
Sim
Quote from: Simmer2 on March 20, 2015, 11:30:40 PM
Hello everyone and thank you for keeping SC4 alive :)
I seem to have a problem with the new RRW texture from Rivit not showing up in game.
I removed any and all rail texture mods I had but that did not work.
I then removed all the plugins but the NAM 32 folders and Rivit's RUM 2 and still no new texture showing, only the original Maxis.
Also none of the wide radius and FAAR pieces have the new texture, also some of the elevated pieces still show the Maxis rail texture.
Any solutions would be greatly appreciated.
Sim
You have to do a Custom Install from the NAM installer and select the RRW to be installed. It does not come in the standard package.
Quote from: Indiana Joe on March 21, 2015, 12:20:15 AM
Quote from: Simmer2 on March 20, 2015, 11:30:40 PM
Hello everyone and thank you for keeping SC4 alive :)
I seem to have a problem with the new RRW texture from Rivit not showing up in game.
I removed any and all rail texture mods I had but that did not work.
I then removed all the plugins but the NAM 32 folders and Rivit's RUM 2 and still no new texture showing, only the original Maxis.
Also none of the wide radius and FAAR pieces have the new texture, also some of the elevated pieces still show the Maxis rail texture.
Any solutions would be greatly appreciated.
Sim
You have to do a Custom Install from the NAM installer and select the RRW to be installed. It does not come in the standard package.
Hello Joe and thank you for the quick response.
Duh! I was looking in the wrong place during the custom install.
Thanks again Joe :)
I have been wanting to see FA STR. Has any of that been developed?
Not yet.
The development of the RRW has been at a standstill ever since the lead modder has been away.
NAM 33 will be more of a RHW focused release again, but future NAM editions are slated to have more RRW content
-eggman121
Back again ;D
Well with the NAM 33 Pre Release out here is some of the Current Plans for NAM 34
I term it as Real Railway FlexTrack.
https://youtu.be/mvReWFhuA2U
Remember this is only going to become available FROM NAM 34 Onwards!!!
I have decided to make this video public to reassure you that the RRW will receive due treatment!
-eggman121
gosh that looks amazing you're really pulling out all the stops wow
Very exciting video... :)
I'm really looking forward to NAM 34..
That looks absolutely fantastic!! Fabulous work so far, very impressive.
Do you think there will be an option for a different base colour by the time it's available for NAM 34 release?
Thanks for all the responses everyone :thumbsup:
Quote from: belfastsocrates on July 30, 2015, 03:48:21 AM
That looks absolutely fantastic!! Fabulous work so far, very impressive.
Do you think there will be an option for a different base colour by the time it's available for NAM 34 release?
I am only working with the standard colors that the RRW originally had but I am not going to be making alternate textures for the RRW.
If you would like I can pass on the textures I am currently using but since there are a lot of textures to make it would be a sizable task to make alternate textures!
-eggman121
Are these single PNGs, or are base and tracks in seperate layers in another format? If it's the latter changing the base wouldn't be too hard: split them into seperate files first, then run through FilterForge to change appearance (similar to what I did with cobble stone roads to dirt roads) (http://i.imgur.com/14Cyhta.jpg) and merge back with the tracks. If they're single PNGs than it might still be feasable to maybe change the coloring of the base in similar fashion (i.e. running batches) but making masks layers would be pain and the marging of tinkering would be far less.
OMG!
This is just awesome. I was waiting for this since years and you make it real. I can't wait to try it in-game.
Thanks for your work :thumbsup:
Eggman, this is unbelievable - a dream becomes true! &apls &apls &apls
Thanks a lot for your work! :thumbsup:
Thanks everyone again for the kind words. $%Grinno$% :thumbsup:
Now textures.
I just had a thought that maybe I could use mgb204's method of Multi Colored Alphas to apply the Ballast. It means that I have to go back and redo my textures. But that should not be a problem.
So here is the plan. there is a base alpha for the Ballast and another alpha for the rails and maybe another for the sleepers. I still have to tune to the mechanics of the textures but if I find it work it is totally plausible to have different texture types based on only a few textures. Hopefully mgb204 will fill me in on the details.
-eggman121
I don't want to be the cause of additional complicated work. I don't have any issue with the rails or sleepers, just the brown ballast. Something more 'grey' would make this perfect for me as it's more 'urban'
Yes it's possible, but unless you've separated track layers as Vortext mentioned to use as templates, you'll find making the new DO alphas probably quite a lot of work.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi991.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf39%2FMGB204%2FRRW-D0_zpsao9nm8cb.jpg%7Eoriginal&hash=da9e42b72c5f1856cf6983523b6389f58041e8b6)
So for example, if you took the default ortho DTR as an example here, isolating the track is very simple (3px wide 1px either side of the main rail), then you need to isolate the sleepers also. With those parts of the texture gone, create a second Alpha layer, combined with the original default Alpha layer (Bottom Left) you'd have your new D0 ready for use. In the example the red parts of the D0 would be the parts that were replaced, gradients included.
However, just for that one texture, I had to manually map the rails and sleepers to isolate them and create the second alpha. Not to mention that a simple ortho texture is a cinch compared to diagonals or complex curve pieces. If you already had the separate layered textures as files, then you would be able to make all the alphas without much effort, but if those were merged and lost when the final textures were processed, once more this process would require unravelling them to be of use. The only benefit to having D0s for automation is really that you can create many custom sets without further effort once the templates are in place.
Of course it's shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted, but it's for this reason that development multi-layered files are always worth keeping aside. I must admit I also had to learn the hard way before I started to think about keeping them for my projects, but then the creator of RRW would have thought of these textures as final no doubt.
Since the NAM has never been in charge of alternate rail textures really - these were always 3rd party mods - I'd expect someone out there to create alternatives at some point. Although, given the exponential rise in the number of textures, this is starting to become very challenging already.
Is it really just the ballast that some of you don't like about the RRW textures? It took a while for RRW to win me over but I find I really like the textures the more I use them, it wasn't an instant thing.
Frankly looking at Eggmans video (some great exciting developments BTW :bnn:), I wouldn't want to miss out on the improvements that are incoming. Not to mention that puzzle pieces are going to be a thing of the past sooner rather than later, so holdouts of the old rail system may end up with reduced functionality in such a scenario (just speculating, I'm not 100% on the actual plans here). Off-hand, since re-using the old rail textures is out of the question due to changes in gauge which would mess with pathing, if the entire texture were changed, not just the ballast, at least that would be a far more practical solution for a texture override in the here and now:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi991.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf39%2FMGB204%2FRRW-Alt_Sample_zps8grzys5g.jpg%7Eoriginal&hash=bf903821809df4cfd26326ec322e18966b53caca)
That's a quick mock-up done as an example with a more grey-tone to the ballast. Eagle-eyed viewers will notice the colour shift of the rails and sleepers too, but I think that's ultimately something that's not unpleasant. It would be possible to batch process the colour offset to every RRW texture with automation, so at least this sort of solution would be eminently practical. Bear in mind that any batted-in textures would match the original RRW textures though, although that should only be bridges and tunnels I think.
Thanks for the prompt Response mgb204 :thumbsup:
Unfortunately the Textures are fixed for most of my working files &mmm But I base most of my work off the extruded geometry of the orthogonal textures. So it wont be that hard to make an alpha set as shown above.
Question? Can I just use the Alpha template for orthogonal and extrapolate it to match the geometry of the tracks? If so I can make some base textures to the color of the different layers? would that work?
-eggman121
I'd personally try a few samples, don't follow my example though ;), the red part needs to be green or cyan, I was being lazy when I made it so didn't correct my error since it was just to show the theory.
Assuming the same geometry would be applied when morphing the D0 Alpha from the ortho one to a given shape, yes this should work. The issue is that the D0 defines what parts of a given texture to replace with another texture. So if all lines up correctly with the green/white parts in relation to the rails/sleepers then this is workable. The overall Alpha doesn't matter too much, since that can be automated in other ways, we just need the rails/sleepers to be correct. I've really messed the sample up, it should look like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi991.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf39%2FMGB204%2FRRW-D0_2_zps7zemze1l.jpg%7Eoriginal&hash=fd4c632b011f18c8e44882883be0e00d1bd8fa1f)
I've attached that for you, so you can play with it, if you send me some morphed variants and point me to the corresponding game textures I can do some quick tests to verify everything if need be. That brings me to the next question, how many of the textures did you create, I was under the impression the original base set came from Willy, so I've no idea how those will fit into this process. That said if we can automate creation of such a set of D0s, that opens the doors to simple custom batch replacements of the ballast for all to customise as they like, which could be a boon to RRW adoption.
Quote from: mgb204 on July 30, 2015, 05:26:01 PM
I was under the impression the original base set came from Willy, so I've no idea how those will fit into this process. That said if we can automate creation of such a set of D0s, that opens the doors to simple custom batch replacements of the ballast for all to customise as they like, which could be a boon to RRW adoption.
Many of the Textures I used came from Willy to make the standard set. Minicurves will no doubt be problematic. So texturing may have to start from scratch. GIMP has a pretty good magic wand tool so, I could edit the textures to alphas from there, I will see how that will go.
Thanks again!
-eggman121
I dunno, the Magic wand in PS certainly wouldn't be accurate enough to do such a task... that said the base set is probably quite small in comparison to the expansions you're creating. The original Maxis set was not so large really, but that's before taking into account the additional puzzle pieces.
Quote from: mgb204 on July 30, 2015, 04:24:51 PM
Is it really just the ballast that some of you don't like about the RRW textures? It took a while for RRW to win me over but I find I really like the textures the more I use them, it wasn't an instant thing.
For me personally it's probably the ballast and sleepers, the RRW rails aren't an issue for me as they do have a realistic 'weathered' look to them. I'm just more aware of modern railways where I live using concrete sleepers.
I think I'm going to give RRW another go and see how I feel about it, I'm rather giddy by the RRW developments being progressed and I would be a massive shame to lose on that fantastic work.
NAM 33 just came out I'm already super excited for NAM 34, fantastic work!
The RRW DTR Y-splitter lacks paths in LHD. Possibly in RHD too, but that's highly unlikely.
Hello Guy's,
By advance, sorry for my bad english, I'm french..
I have a problem with the RRW, when I drive a train and arrive at a switch, I can't choose direction because there is not the green/red direction arrow... It is normal, or existing a solution of this problem?
I don't want to delete the RRW, because it is a very very great add..!
Flashouille
Sadly the additional code required for the switches has yet to be added to allow this functionality with RRW. I can't say if or when this will happen, I suspect it's not the highest priorty though.
Quote from: mgb204 on August 04, 2015, 04:18:13 PM
Sadly the additional code required for the switches has yet to be added to allow this functionality with RRW. I can't say if or when this will happen sadly, I suspect it's not the highest priorty though.
It should not be too hard to make the Junction paths. Although at this point in time we are polishing off NAM 33. For NAM 34 I aim to fix this problem since Static pieces will become a thing of the past.
The RRW was presented too quickly IMHO and as such I am trying to fix it up with new content.
-eggman121
When could we expect the catenaries in RRW?
Quote from: Girafe on August 04, 2015, 04:50:53 PM
When could we expect the catenaries in RRW?
That's definitely on the list :thumbsup:
I have to rework all my T21ing for the new components but It should be achievable. I am just trying to get the base network up and running so I have to deal with that first. With the cohort working thanks to
Memo I should be able to put alternative styles in as well. I will see what time frame I have. It is not certain if there will be catenaries in the next NAM version
but I have high hopes of it eventuating. One thing to note. Puzzle pieces will not support catenaries! only draggable/ Flex equivalents.
-eggman121
All your work on the RRW is much appreciated eggman121! NAM 33 just fell from the heavens, but seeing some of your work makes me already anticipating 34 ;D
I don't know how Karma points work, but just picture me lobbing karma grenades in your general direction :D
Quote from: Simcoug on August 04, 2015, 09:18:05 PM
All your work on the RRW is much appreciated eggman121! NAM 33 just fell from the heavens, but seeing some of your work makes me already anticipating 34 ;D
I don't know how Karma points work, but just picture me lobbing karma grenades in your general direction :D
Why thank you :thumbsup:
Speaking of Wye's here are some I made today ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDraggable%2520Wye%2520R1%2520R2%2520R3_zpsc2uvhz4y.jpg&hash=fab83a8fe9057a116313ac5bd165961d08963660) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Draggable%20Wye%20R1%20R2%20R3_zpsc2uvhz4y.jpg.html)
The karma would be nice but what impresses me more is the work that I have done is bringing delight to many of you in the SC4 community which is not limited to SC4D but also Simtropolis.
I plan to stay here for a while and I guess my main motivation for expanding the RRW is to complete the mission ?$%kar&%h that was started by Willy so all of you can enjoy &bis&
Thanks again!
-eggman121
I'm new to the whole dish-out-deserving-K-points-as-a-moderator thing.
But Matt, I think I agree with you. This work has been completely hidden from the public until now, and it is fairly awesome, so Stephen, have a K-point from SimCoug and me as a thank you for your continued work on this project, and for having said work be so incredible to boot.
I am looking forward to NAM 34 as well, just to see these developments in my cities. Thanks again for the hard work.
-Absalom
Thank you for the kind works and the K-point ;D
You two are quite well respected on this site and it is people like you that make such a project worthwhile.
I have been working on this project for a while now. I was probably one of the first to agree that the RRW was a game changing project. I guess with a rail renaissance in both RL and SC4 that I had to continue the mission of making a realistic and diverse set of tracks to compliment the rest of the networks. It was one of the main things that where lacking until now.
I have many projects up my sleeve and will start on them when the time is right but for now lets steam along for a flex, draggable RRW ()stsfd().
-eggman121/ Stephen
A rail renaissance that has been long overdue. I'm thrilled someone is dedicating themselves to revitalising rail and making it visually attractive and realistic. I think that's highly commendable and it's very exciting seeing all the progress thus far.
These Y-switches are awesome! &apls
Although I wasn´t able to change my current region rail style into RRW, I am heavily waiting for the NAM 34. I can´t tell you, how much I appreciate your work here. I am just someone, who always wanted and still wants to play SimCity with a realistic railway system. And I know, that the next NAM will make me start a new region only for this. :bnn:
Do you plan to make a texture set for lotting purposes? Would be nice to have seamless tracks everywhere. :)
Great development Stephen!! &apls &apls &apls
I didn't install the RRW because is an alpha release, but with the next NAM I will definitely use it. :thumbsup:
Thanks for all the kind words everyone :thumbsup:
Well here is another teaser $%Grinno$%
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR_2_Crossings_zpswr8lebb6.jpg&hash=74cfd5c0b80eb9d946c853e924704a0058bc2731) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR_2_Crossings_zpswr8lebb6.jpg.html)
It is FARR2 with crossings. One of them elevated.
Thanks again :thumbsup:
-eggman121
stupendacular!!! :bnn: :party: %BUd%
Elevated FAR Crossings, yes, yes, yes - I've been wanting those very badly.
Eggman I have been following your work on developing the RRW and it is freaking amazing. I saw this video of the latest RRW pieces being developed, all draggable, and my mind was blown! Does this mean draggable RRW pieces will have that low wealth grass texture?
Anyway, what you are doing with the RRW is even more impressive than the new RHW- I really love railways in SC4.
p.s. Your new RRW pieces have the prettiest of textures, especially the FAR RRW road crossing.
Amazing development
Surely one of the most wanted feature in the NAM ;)
If you haven't heard it enough, your work is always amazing Stephen. When Willy took a hiatus I thought this project might die off. Hats off to ya for keeping it alive; all these railroad enthusiasts need you. &apls Moar karma for that man I say.
Since the issue of textures is still coming up these days I thought I'd upload my retexture work I was doing a year or two ago. Below there's some dropbox links with an incomplete texture mod ready to go in DAT form
(pics) (http://imgur.com/a/m0dlM), and a cluttered folder with PNGs and GIMP files of my experiments. You can find railyard textures in there too.
RRW Retexture DATs (https://www.dropbox.com/s/uw7c084kyvafmfj/RRW%20Retexture%20DATs.zip?dl=0)Texture Work Folder (https://www.dropbox.com/s/1nmvwurwujs2b93/Railway%20Texture%20Work.zip?dl=0)And here are Willy's master textures. I don't have his express permission to upload them, but they are only the PNG layers of what is already publicly available in FSH form so I can't imagine there would be an issue. If he requests of course I'll take it down.
Swordmaster RRW master textures (https://www.dropbox.com/s/u4iscna9w0esmti/Swordmaster%20RealRailway%20master%20textures.zip?dl=0)I've hardly touched SimCity 4 stuff this year. Until I get back to it, thought I'd post all that so that anyone with GIMP can play around if they want to. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Vizoria on August 06, 2015, 03:18:13 AM
Does this mean draggable RRW pieces will have that low wealth grass texture?
For you sir.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ks52lm1i23vnrrf/Low%20Wealth%20Green%20Rail%20Textures.zip?dl=0
Place in the z__NAM folder. Just don't get used to that kind of turnaround time for most NAM stuff. :P
--Matt
Thanks for releasing these. Could come in useful.
That Texture Work Folder link is pointing to the RRW retexture though.
Cheers!
Thanks Indiana Joe, I'll give these RRW textures a try on a new city tile this evening!
Edit, I downloaded the textures but the zip file has no content inside of it.
Great work eggman121.
Well am still waiting for some viaduct ;)
Quote from: vester on August 08, 2015, 04:21:21 PM
Great work eggman121.
Well am still waiting for some viaduct ;)
IID Scheme pending. Will show some results when an IID Scheme for Elevated rail come around. I'm keen to get rails off the ground. :thumbsup:
Anyways here is my latest work ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDual%2520DTR%2520Crossover_zpsxy9htldp.jpg&hash=fa3f5cc02eec046418abef29272a434387cf39e2) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Dual%20DTR%20Crossover_zpsxy9htldp.jpg.html)
Guess what this may be used for!
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on August 09, 2015, 02:03:24 AM
Guess what this may be used for!
Lemme guess, a crissy-cross switchy-swatch? :P
Awesome stuff! At last a compact crossing for two railway lines.
Hmmm.. could be used for a lot of things.. but mainly, to tempt us &apls
Amazing stuff!
Excellent work as always Stephen &apls &apls. This project is so lucky to have you!
Could really use this piece for the approach of stations. :)
Great work and this truly is a useful piece. &apls
Speaking of Elevated Rails, is there any way to make elevated connector to Maxis elevated rail.
The base game's default Elevated Rail network is more of a light rail network, rather than the heavy rail of the RRW, so connecting the two isn't in the plans. We are still trying to figure out just what all will happen with RRW viaducts--they're a high priority, but they might take awhile to make it in, because of what's involved. They'll be draggable when they do come, however.
-Alex
Tarkus,
Curios, someone, I am not sure created a piece several years ago that connects the "Maxis" Elevated Rail to a ramp type piece to ground rail. If that is the case, then could't one do the same with an elevated piece to connect to the future Elevated RRW? I have honestly always wanted that piece and the piece that was created many years ago does not look very realistic as today creations and creators such as your self are REALLY IMPROVING the SC4 game.
If you're talking about hooking ground RRW to elevated RRW, then that's very much in the cards (and you can sort of do it with the existing viaducts, though they aren't particularly adapted to RRW specs at present).
In theory, ELR-to-ERRW could be done just like the old transition you've described. But with the exception of the workaround we did to allow Light Rail UDI, Heavy and Light Rail are not supposed to mix under NAM standards (doubly so with the RRW's focus on realism), so it would not be something we would produce.
-Alex
Will the heavy rail paths remain on the Light Rail tracks? UDI isn't that big for me, per se, but part of the region I am "reinterpreting" for my MD has Light Rail trains run on heavy rail track, and I'd like to be able to present the illusion of this occurring without resorting to Photoshop/GIMP (I can use the Light Rail track for the heavy rail paths, or a Light Rail automata generator near Heavy Rail to simulate this currently due to the way the automata seems to be handled by the game)
As far as I know, the Heavy Rail paths will remain on the Light Rail tracks (and will continue to be added to any new Light Rail content), as that is what allows the Light Rail UDI functionality. While it's not a feature one really hears about, we'd probably hear quite a bit from the small but devoted segment of users who are big into UDI if we nixed that.
-Alex
Amazing stuff. The game is reinvented yet again.
David
I think dyoungyn is referring to this kind of transition (http://hide-inoki.com/bbs/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=292).
If that's the case, then the "piece" is a transit enabled lot. It's really more of a station - the elevated light rail passengers get off the station and then take a heavy rail train (and vice versa) - and not really a connection between the two networks.
Quote from: Kuewr665 on August 13, 2015, 08:22:48 AM
If that's the case, then the "piece" is a transit enabled lot. It's really more of a station - the elevated light rail passengers get off the station and then take a heavy rail train (and vice versa) - and not really a connection between the two networks.
It would constitute as being a transit station rather than being a puzzle piece (or draggable component), and as such, is subject to all of the NAM Team's recommendations for transit stations. (The problem is that it just doesn't look the part.)
On that note, there are a handful of stations that fulfil this kind of functionality, even a few included in the NAM, but some of them are large transit hubs.
You could easily repurpose the GLR->EL-Rail ramp from the NAM to make such a piece, it just requires the correct transit switch in place to make it work functionally.
You all are really hitting the nail on the head. I have been wanting this piece for years as the game is more and more realistic, the need is greater.
Thank you all so much for all the great things that are being created for SC4.
Quote from: dyoungyn on August 13, 2015, 06:17:56 PM
You all are really hitting the nail on the head. I have been wanting this piece for years as the game is more and more realistic, the need is greater.
Don't get too ahead of yourself. Rail mixing is not supposed to be even a feature, but it's an unwanted side effect of making Light Rail UDIable. It even has an unwanted side effect of slowing down heavy rail traffic. The closest you can get to that is a transit station that offloads passengers from one train to another, not an actual puzzle piece that allows trains from one rail to ride on the other.
Just for clarity, my intention was merely to state that such a model exists and could be made into a prop to create such a lot/transit switch.
I wouldn't really be interested in making such a thing personally, I consider the two networks very separate entities. If you want to elevate your rail why switch to light-rail to do it, wouldn't it simply be easier to use the NAM Rail Viaducts which were designed for this purpose?
For the situation involving rail mixing, I still find it more befitting to have a transit hub that can switch passengers between the two types of trains (heck, you could go for three if you add HSR, even four if you had subways) rather than to visually cheat the system by faking a physical connection between two completely unrelated and separate rail systems. Even if you fake it that way, it's still fake in that it's not functional and still a transit station.
On the subject of lots that look like puzzle pieces, I recall there being something that switched from avenue to two parallel roads.
Yeah, I believe that was a Japanese developer who did that one. It's at least not mixing transit types willy-nilly, but there's no plans to incorporate anything like that, either.
-Alex
Quote from: eggman121 on August 09, 2015, 02:03:24 AM
Anyways here is my latest work ;D
Great work, but... what happened to the overhead wire? Has it been ditched? I remember some pics I had seen in the past, and I really liked them.
Quote from: eggman121 on August 09, 2015, 02:03:24 AM
Guess what this may be used for!
Well I can see some use for this. This track layout is called scissors junction, and is useful for the "terminal" (not "through") type of stations - put it just out of the station, so trains can change tracks.
Quote from: APSMS on August 12, 2015, 06:43:53 PM
Will the heavy rail paths remain on the Light Rail tracks? UDI isn't that big for me, per se, but part of the region I am "reinterpreting" for my MD has Light Rail trains run on heavy rail track, and I'd like to be able to present the illusion of this occurring without resorting to Photoshop/GIMP (I can use the Light Rail track for the heavy rail paths, or a Light Rail automata generator near Heavy Rail to simulate this currently due to the way the automata seems to be handled by the game)
Ehmmm, heavy rail automata can be tricked to run on light rail track (which of course looks unrealistic), not the opposite. Having light rail automata running on heavy rail track is absolutely realistic, and it happens in the real world too, at least in Europe, where many local/commuter/suburban EMUs and DMUs partially use the same network as the mainline trains (eg up to 100 or even 200km off the city centre). I was actually about to do make a set of puzzle pieces (like the GLR's), serving both rail types (and of course having both path types), using the standard rail textures. This wouldn't really be much work, and would be functional too. But then I lost interest on SC4 and abandoned the idea. This would as well require re-modding the stations you want to use (so as to serve both rail types).
As for your MD, I could instead think of two altermatives:
- Make your rail network "regional", rather than "intercity" (duh). It's not hard at all, just use small stations (for more realistic views) and install a mod that replaces SC4's trains with something that looks more like an EMU/DMU.
- Some little modding, change the heavy rail automata exemplars so that they use the light rail automata models (really little work) - isntall them for just taking the shots.
Quote from: cogeo on August 14, 2015, 08:36:37 AM
Great work, but... what happened to the overhead wire? Has it been ditched? I remember some pics I had seen in the past, and I really liked them.
There still coming, but not at the highest priority at the moment. I have to get the pieces being functional first. They probably wont appear when draggable rail viaducts become a thing.
-eggman121
Quote from: mgb204 on August 13, 2015, 06:40:01 PM
Just for clarity, my intention was merely to state that such a model exists and could be made into a prop to create such a lot/transit switch.
I wouldn't really be interested in making such a thing personally, I consider the two networks very separate entities. If you want to elevate your rail why switch to light-rail to do it, wouldn't it simply be easier to use the NAM Rail Viaducts which were designed for this purpose?
I am so happy here this has caused a dialog of interest.:thumbsup: Yes, NAM Rail Viaducts are GREAT,&apls, HOWEVER,&idea, one cannot make a neighbor connection with the viaducts unless&idea someone could post a tutorial:bnn: to such a thing then the transition piece would be a thing of the past &hlp. All that I ever wanted is raised rail that connects to neighbors that can easily transition to ground realistically such as viaducts.
Quote from: dyoungyn on August 14, 2015, 04:19:00 PM
Yes, NAM Rail Viaducts are GREAT,&apls, HOWEVER,&idea, one cannot make a neighbor connection with the viaducts unless&idea someone could post a tutorial:bnn: to such a thing then the transition piece would be a thing of the past
That's always been possible for ages; just make a regular rail connection and then place the viaduct pieces on top. No convoluted transitions even needed.
Our stance on rail mixing is still unchanged, however.
It'll be even simpler when the Rail Viaducts become draggable.
-Alex
I am wondering if L1 RRW will be draggable. I have seen a picture of L1 RRW early in the thread, but it is a piece and not draggable.
Quote from: Kuewr665 on August 15, 2015, 02:03:15 AM
I am wondering if L1 RRW will be draggable. I have seen a picture of L1 RRW early in the thread, but it is a piece and not draggable.
L1 RRW will definitely be draggable when it arrives. There's never been an actual L1 RRW puzzle piece made, to my knowledge. It is certainly possible that Willy or someone else might have prototyped L1 earlier in this thread, as a direct replacement over the existing L2 puzzle models, but there will be no L1 RRW puzzle pieces released.
All future viaduct development with Rail/RRW as well as Road, OWR, and Avenue (and potentially NWM networks), will be draggable.
-Alex
A-ha, that must be what they did.
Quote from: GDO29Anagram on August 13, 2015, 06:28:29 PM
Don't get too ahead of yourself. Rail mixing is not supposed to be even a feature, but it's an unwanted side effect of making Light Rail UDIable...
Can blame me for this :P. In hindsight I probably shouldn't have implemented them in the original ELRail concept/paths, I should have shelved it along with UDI Subway. But what can I say, I don't mind it.
Quote from: Vizoria on August 06, 2015, 06:42:57 AM
Edit, I downloaded the textures but the zip file has no content inside of it.
Whoops, didn't see this. Seems to be working for me however. Double checked on another computer. If someone else wants to help confirm that would be great!
Don't know if you updated the .zip or not, but it worked for me as of 2 minutes ago.
Total MRCs for RRW anyone ::)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FRRW%2520MRC%2520All_zpsha8nofdq.jpg&hash=2420cde97d1231d62aea45b569154b2e6d4c9bf5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RRW%20MRC%20All_zpsha8nofdq.jpg.html)
Hope you like. I also have a secret weapon in the works ?$%kar&%h
I will present it in a video that I plan to make when I have figured out the mechanics.
Still a bit of work to do in RRW land. Gosh I believe that the RRW rails could rival the flexability of the C:S rails with the new functionality.
Cant wait to get your impressions!
-eggman121
For my money, RRW rivals CS rails for looks since ever and functionality too (because they can't be used in SC4 anyways $%Grinno$%). Seriously, though, the smoothness of these curves is mind-blowing and I'm really grateful that you give the railways the appreciation they deserve!
This is mind blowing!!!! :P
Indeed mindblowing! :bnn:
And all the work with RRW can rivale C:SL rails. Although SC4 has to live with the grid in some ways, I don´t see realistic rails in C.SL for now. This is not a question of curves alone, C.SL is much too much concentrated on street traffic. ;D
Those curves are beautiful. :thumbsup:
Incredibly smooth curves. Agree with carlfatal, it will be a long time before modders in CS match the RRW and its forthcoming expansion.
curvalicious! :thumbsup:
If we're talking about CS, that's one of the real issues with a free-form road system and no grid, it's always a nightmare to line multiple tracks up nicely, I'm rarely happy with the results.
As it stands though this is a great development, only logical to see some of the RHW innovations making their way into the rest of the NAM, certainly a place where removing puzzle pieces will be welcomed. I really love some of the switches too, the type of thing I've long been wishing was possible, can't wait to see where all this innovation ends up :thumbsup:.
Here is my latest working of the RRW Flextrack that I was promising to show you. Included is the new functionality for that I have just made in the last couple of days.
https://www.youtube.com/v/VXinZJTQle4
I have included commentary in this video so please mind my Australian Accent.
There are a few new pieces in there to keep you guessing!
Hope you all enjoy &bis&
-eggman121
that is.... :o .... magic! 0.o
OMG :o :o :o :o :o :o
ahah fantastic,
our Mr. catenaries will have lot of job :P
Incredible, incredible track pieces!
Wow. Flabbergasting!
Wow, this is very useful, finally we getting a functional rail system. Thank you very much. Will this be included in the NAM 33?
S W E E T ! ! !
One Karma point :thumbsup:
It really incredible work, I echo all of the praise dished out so far.
YEAH! :bnn:
Well, it seems I can only echo what has already been said. Good work on the Flextracks, it will certainly become one of the most liked feature of the future NAMs.
Quote from: Zeratai on September 03, 2015, 06:34:58 AMWill this be included in the NAM 33?
If I remember correctly, it'll be included starting at NAM34.
I've just been looking once more at the automation of RRW textures and came up with this sample:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4437/36278087751_672559d0b9_o.jpg)
It's only the Straight and Diagonal textures right now, but if automation could be applied to the whole RRW set, the ballast and sleepers could be customised with just two textures needed, the rest would be done for you automatically. Sample DAT for anyone that wants to test them in-game attached, See Next page for newer version instead.
I really like the idea of concrete sleepers, make the rail much more 'modern' and urban in nature I think. I do think the ballast is a touch too light but I appreciate this is early days.
I'm exciting about the prospect of choosing a different texture for RRW. Such a fantastic future beckons for SC4 heavy rail.
niiiiice, I hope the rest of the automation goes smoothly :D
Disclaimer:
I don't want anyone to think I'm planning on making this happen, I'm willing to help out with anyone that wants to make the Definition Alphas required to make this work. But having made 2,500 such alphas already and given the more complex nature of RRW textures, it's a combination of beyond my skill level and the amount of time I'd be willing to commit to with all the other projects I've got outstanding.
Looks nice! If I understand correctly you made two Definition Alpha for the sleepers and ballast by hand? I'm wondering if that too could be automated. Maybe I could run the original RRW textures through some highpass / edge detection filters. . &Thk/(
edit: just tried quickly and the issue is the ballast is too noisy to properly isolate the sleepers, i.e. still would need cleaning up by hand. Best I could do for now:
(https://dl.dropbox.com/s/uixyhrhww3ewlgv/rrw%20highpass.jpg?dl=0)
In essence what I had to do was 1st take the normal alpha channel. Then I removed the rails (straight is easy, 3px wide) and created a second alpha. Then I removed the sleepers and created a third alpha channel. These three channels can then be combined to make the Definition alphas required for the automation to work thusly:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4358/35579377304_826866218b_o.jpg)
With the straight, that's very easy to realise, but after that life gets harder, diagonals are not much fun but all the different radius curves just make this a job that can't realistically be done without a steady hand and a far better knowledge of the software than I have.
As has been previously mentioned, if the multi-layered images existed for these textures, it can be automated completely, but they don't :(. One problem working with the RRW textures is that their very quality makes editing them harder than the basic Maxis rail textures, there are many subtle colour tones and this makes isolating parts from the whole very tricky.
I'd imagine the best solution would be to apply the same adjustments to the straight D0 that are used to turn the regular RRW Ortho texture into a curve to create new D0's to match those pieces. I think provided the rails matched up, this should work fine, since you don't need to be pixel perfect here. For example, if you look at the Diagonal D0 I quickly knocked up you can see I actually used a uniform spacing for the sleepers (Cyan Colour) that was not actually a mirror of the actual texture, yet the in-game results are fine.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4394/36414554215_2c31b4ae8e_o.jpg)
But such things are simply beyond my skills texturing. Damn you Belfastsocrates, ever since you mentioned the bloody sleepers being wood I've come round to the idea that indeed concrete sleepers would make more sense in urban environments :P.
Maybe at the very least this could be combined with Noah's efforts on the GLR to make a rural (well, more like non-inner city) track set? I don't know. I'm not fond of concrete sleepers, but maybe that's just because all the rail lines in America are old, and the still set new lines with wood sleepers depending on the traffic (suburbs, etc.).
Quote from: mgb204 on September 07, 2015, 06:36:21 AMDamn you Belfastsocrates, ever since you mentioned the bloody sleepers being wood I've come round to the idea that indeed concrete sleepers would make more sense in urban environments :P.
:satisfied:
Well I got a PM from mgb204 and was able to patch this one together...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FGoFSH_Alternate_Textures_zpsdkkivrcr.jpg&hash=241840fff746fc40ac4dc11272d7713ea15715dc) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/GoFSH_Alternate_Textures_zpsdkkivrcr.jpg.html)
What do others think?
I will need to rejig my repository of textures, but I would put this sort of customization after the Release of NAM 34 when the base flex track workings are mostly complete ::)
So it is completely possible that given time there will be custom sets that can be generated but I am thinking forward again.
Also custom textures (Which there are about three base ones) will certainly come into play.
As I have said before, I generate most of my textures off an orthogonal texture. So this is why I have been able to make the textures so quickly.
I'm all ears for feedback. I would consider this to be a medium term project.
-eggman121
Pretty sure the sleepers are only that clean for a very short while.
Think that it could well be concrete sleepers that Willy did, only just dirty.
Remember that he is a train driver.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not unhappy with Willy's original textures by any means, they are gorgeous and I've been using them for well over a year and making huge efforts to ensure the entire set of rail textures was RRW compatible. They may be concrete, but I think this is just a matter of personal preference, just look at the various sets for the old rail standard, people just like to have options. I must say I really like the sample texture Eggman has shown off, creating textures is not exactly my best skill but the contrasting ballast here really improves them from the mock-ups I made yesterday.
Within the NAM team there is a desire to get everyone on board with RRW, because it really is the future of rail in SC4 and if we can provide a solution to make custom texture sets a doddle for anyone to create that's only going to help us to persuade users to upgrade. Going back a few years we could rely on modders to create custom texture sets, but these days such mods are few and far between, so if it helps with adoption then I think adding some variety in the NAM options is no bad thing. Not to mention that the idea of a user-customisable drop-in replacement is a revolution in terms of what is possible.
Quote from: vortext on September 07, 2015, 04:43:59 AM
Looks nice! If I understand correctly you made two Definition Alpha for the sleepers and ballast by hand? I'm wondering if that too could be automated. Maybe I could run the original RRW textures through some highpass / edge detection filters. . &Thk/(
edit: just tried quickly and the issue is the ballast is too noisy to properly isolate the sleepers, i.e. still would need cleaning up by hand. Best I could do for now:
Quote from: mgb204 on September 07, 2015, 06:36:21 AM
In essence what I had to do was 1st take the normal alpha channel. Then I removed the rails (straight is easy, 3px wide) and created a second alpha. Then I removed the sleepers and created a third alpha channel. These three channels can then be combined to make the Definition alphas required for the automation to work thusly:
Guys! Just use the original RRW alpha layers. I uploaded them a few pages back. :thumbsup:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTUOWHDz.png&hash=53e6f8b13b0ce7544da279aaa33f7284d43a0260) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F63vUigb.png&hash=a124665d4748b7224962dbd9f72329833d0b0835) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtZfSuUi.png&hash=522e024263a8a82155163f1642d3ff5cb767ace3)
And every single other texture is available with the original alpha layers.
All 500 of them or whatever. Don't make more work for yourself if it's already done. :P
Holy sh.. :o Completely missed that! Well that definitely makes things a whole lot easier! &apls
edit: links to files are found here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15931.msg496900#msg496900).
&ops Yes, that would make life a lot easier, thanks for pointing that out.
That being the case, I should be able to whip up the D0's for the existing base set if Eggman wants to cover the new textures he's creating.
:Edit: OK this is a game changer right here, I've finalised the base DTR networks and lot textures, sample attached.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4370/36414553705_7764215399_o.jpg)
Remember any ballast and sleepers can be auto-generated with just two textures, so it looks like a fully-automated user customisable RRW texture set is a possibility that conforms to the original standards of Willy's set. ()stsfd()
Still some way to go, but knocking up the D0's is now a reasonably quick job, thanks Indiana Joe for pointing me in the right direction on this.
Just to show you some possibilities, I've knocked up an animated GIF:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4410/36239249942_d653e4823d_o.gif)
It's unbelievable!! :oQuote from: mgb204 on September 08, 2015, 05:42:25 AM
...
Just to show you some possibilities, I've knocked up an animated GIF:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi991.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf39%2FMGB204%2FRRW-Original_zpsksda3lmv.gif%7Eoriginal&hash=87d25c2d6e2e7137412512e1ab2f2b6e9f41ae3e)
I like most the 2nd (urban?), the 4th (rural?) and the 6th (industrial?) &hlp
It would be ideal a starter, as the SAM, for different texture! ;)
Quote from: vinlabsc3k on September 08, 2015, 12:11:54 PM
It would be ideal a starter, as the SAM, for different texture! ;)
These are just going to be different texture varieties. There will be no SAM setups!
This is due to technical constraints.
-eggman121
that is so great, thank you for showing us all those combinations XD
Yep, it's certainly nice to have all the templates right there. Easy enough to plug in some color scripts and you can get all the colors of the rainbow.
However, as many NAMites have found out over the years with RHW textures, simple re-color mods leave much to be desired when it comes to balance and detail. Many attempts to create concrete highway textures through a script have been trashed because...it just doesn't look as good.
Different materials have different textures to them. That's why wood or pavement doesn't convert to concrete very well. I could never get satisfactory results in my experiments just by recoloring Willy's textures. Each textural set needs its own shadows and details.
With the right balance of shading and textural noise, you get that 3D effect. Here's my example with concrete ties.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmYLrXF6.png&hash=4389dc0a3df32288616ab4065edae66d4559fb32)
If you guys manage to create a simple program to make texture sets to order, I still think that would be phenomenal. But I don't think, in it's current form, it stands up to custom made textures. Needs a lot of tweaking.
I definitely LMAO'd at cheese & bacon though. Wiimeiser would probably appreciate some ridiculous textures like that :thumbsup: $%Grinno$%
Quote from: Indiana Joe on September 08, 2015, 02:54:56 PM
Yep, it's certainly nice to have all the templates right there. Easy enough to plug in some color scripts and you can get all the colors of the rainbow.
However, as many NAMites have found out over the years with RHW textures, simple re-color mods leave much to be desired when it comes to balance and detail. Many attempts to create concrete highway textures through a script have been trashed because...it just doesn't look as good.
Different materials have different textures to them. That's why wood or pavement doesn't convert to concrete very well. I could never get satisfactory results in my experiments just by recoloring Willy's textures. Each textural set needs its own shadows and details.
With the right balance of shading and textural noise, you get that 3D effect.
Absolutely correct, the technique for automation was envisioned for the grass and sidewalk parts of road networks to be replaced. Whilst you can use it for a number of other potential uses, there are some drawbacks with automation that simply require manual work to resolve. That said, unlike say CP's path textures which I tried but could not get satisfactory results with, in this case I think the end textures are good enough for use. Of course if someone came along and made a complete set of properly made textures the quality would be better, but right now given the small number of such people within the community this at least should help to provide some alternate options for those users who find RRW is not to their particular tastes. The 3D effect is sort of kept, because the gradients of the alphas dictate how much of the imported texture is utilised, it's not 100% perfect, but I'm happy enough with the results that I think we have something acceptable for use here.
I too like the 6th texture; the concrete slabs. Though they are all quite nice, even if the cheese is a bit questionable... ;)
Amazing job with this semi automation &apls
However from a personal point of view, I would prefer to see a fully finished RRW with Willy s texture before seing alternative textures.
It s more about going deeply than largely.
So many things are still missing with the current RRW textures but it s only my opinion ::)
This is really wonderful! &apls &apls
But as of yet I think that Willy's originals are still my personal favourite -- as far as I'm concerned Swedish railbeds are quite brownish in urban newly built sections, too. So I agree with Girafe, that depth's the most important.
Quote from: Girafe on September 09, 2015, 11:36:09 AM
So many things are still missing with the current RRW textures but it s only my opinion ::)
Indeed as of NAM 32 I would agree with you.
Myself, Rivit and others have worked very hard to bridge these gaps for NAM 33's release. I also know Rivit has plans to update the RUM for RRW for NAM33 to omit any files that are no longer necessary and where required add any missing textures. I already have a pretty complete set (in fact if gaps exist, I don't know of them) as does Rivit as we collaborated together on them a few months back.
Therefore if you are having problems with missing textures after NAM 33 is installed, please do point them out and one way or another the textures will be updated/uploaded swiftly :).
Regarding the RRW status I know there won't be substantial upgrade for the NAM 33 Full release...
But NAM 34 will have the RRW in the center of development.
So here are my latest efforts!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FSTR%2520FARR%2520Draggable_zpsjwlxnmii.jpg&hash=5446acf58a0f3a8742aa8c1de4746b712abb164f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/STR%20FARR%20Draggable_zpsjwlxnmii.jpg.html)
RRW Draggable FARR anyone ::)
I plan to have both STR and DTR versions for both FAR2 and FAR3.
Feel free to comment ;)
-eggman121
Simply stunning!
And it would be totally awesome to have the two FAR variations for STR too! :thumbsup:
Amazing Eggman :thumbsup:
Only one regret, availability in NAM 34 :P
Draggable FAR RRW = :bnn: :bnn: :bnn: :bnn: :bnn:
Very cool and exciting. :) Nam 34 can't come soon enough!
Sweet! NAM 34 is going to be one of the biggest events in SC4 history thanks to you!
Amazing progress. I've missed a lot of good stuff from my SC4 hiatus. &apls
Your RRW progress is beyond stunning Stephen :squirrel: :bnn: :o 34 will be a NAM to remember!
Really excited about the texture collaboration you and mgb204 are putting together as well!
RRW, is going to be one of the big corner stones for the NAM 34 release..
a Big thanks Stephen, for your amazing efforts here my friend :thumbsup:
Simply Astounding! I love all the stuff you've done so far! The only thing I can ask for is a short release cycle. I cannot wait to get my hands on this. ;D
I have posted at simtropolis but I will post here as well!
I have come to the stage where FlexTrack is usable in cities. This is a good chance to catch any oddities that may arise before the eventual release.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FOverview%2520Station_zps2dglvh2l.jpg&hash=918836109d8eec09fa611dfe7ff5ec196ef7fa19) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Overview%20Station_zps2dglvh2l.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDouble%2520Crossover%2520Testing_zpspgitre71.jpg&hash=ff38d41a16ce5c357e1bd2bd0485600b8f7e3523) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Double%20Crossover%20Testing_zpspgitre71.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FMRC%2520R4%2520and%2520Compound%2520curve%2520Testing_zpslk3t6lw5.jpg&hash=235c04e2a1c9ac7641fd8d7fa6833a8c1160d7c0) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/MRC%20R4%20and%20Compound%20curve%20Testing_zpslk3t6lw5.jpg.html)
So what I can see is that some overhanging textures need to be adjusted and some path numbers need to be aligned.
So far I am seeing some real progress in the direction of the Flextrack and this technology will extend to further parts of the rail and non-rail networks.
Thank you all for the feedback so far ;D and hope to hear some feedback soon!
-eggman121
more more more :bnn: :bnn: :bnn:
Just beautiful :o Of been dreaming of being able to make these kinds of things for so many years now!
It's great to know this is becoming a reality... :)
Awesome stuff! RRW will be the highlight of NAM 34.
With GREAT and IMAGINATIVE creators, SC4 is becoming more and more of a realistic city building strategy game that I have been planing now for well over 13 years. Keep em coming and with all that wonderful work. Thank for all involved.
%BUd% %BUd% %BUd%
WOW!! &apls
Stunning + fantastic work here !!, Stephen
Seems like I have lost a few posts :o :o :o
Something amazing is going on here....
Can you explain please why some of my custom Stations have the new Textures and some of them don't? For example this BEAST of a Station (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/25834-main-railway-station-by-logan123456/) has absolutly no RRW Textures at all wile others of them have. And this one has a little Bug in it (http://i.imgur.com/EpxHSmj.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/EpxHSmj.jpg)).
How can i fix this by myself (please note i know what the LOT Editor is and i made a little Forrestpark by myself but in no way i'm good with that Tool) ;D. Or will this be addressed in the Future?
Thx
For the supported RRW Lot Textures to work, the original creator must have used the Rail Texture from Maxis when creating the lot, since those ID's are what are overridden by the NAM.
To fix any stations not using the Maxis texture IDs, simply open them in the Lot Editor and change to overlay textures to the Maxis ones on the appropriate tiles. Save the file, next time in game it will show RRW textures. This should be possible for normal straight and diagonal textures for STR and DTR stations.
Secondly, if a specific texture is not supported (the diagonal splitter) by overrides, it will show incorrectly as in your 2nd picture. This would require someone to make a suitable replacement texture, to my knowledge no such piece has been released. Is that the standard Maxis Large Rail Station (forget the exact name)? If so, I'll make a quick update and attach it here, since we should be covering all Maxis content at least.
Bear in mind, due to the nature of lotting, who know how many different textures exist or where they were used? It's impossible for the NAM team to resolve all of these problems for you. Whilst efforts are underway to provide the best coverage possible, a tiny amount of work in the LE would fix most of these issues easily if they bother you.
The main station you used is using a custom texture pack not yet supported by the RRW. You can manually edit all the textures.. Or wait a bit since work is in progress. ;)
Quote from: mgb204 on October 29, 2015, 09:18:28 AM
Is that the standard Maxis Large Rail Station (forget the exact name)?
Its the Grand Railroad Station from Maxis i think, i have so much custom Content i dont even know anymore what is Maxis and what is Custom :)
I will try to fix some of the Stuff myself ;)
Quote from: art128 on October 29, 2015, 09:19:24 AM
The main station you used is using a custom texture pack not yet supported by the RRW. You can manually edit all the textures.. Or wait a bit since work is in progress. ;)
All the Lots who have missing RRW Textures are using the same 2 Texture Replacers, the Rail Yard and Spur Mega Pak 1 version 2 2 / and the Rail Yard and Spur Textures Mega Pack 1 1.
Link: http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/22325-rail-yard-and-spur-mega-pak-1-version-2/?tab=comments
http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/15976-rail-yard-and-spur-textures-mega-pack-1/
I dont know how to edit these, so i will wait, its not THAT big of a deal, just looks strange. Like you said, work in Progress :)
Thx for the Help
If I recall correctly, the Railyard and Spur pack was excluded deliberately. The RRW has somewhat restrictive (and, admittedly, self-imposed) design standards and these don't have the flexibility that NCD's packs would require.
A new set of railyard textures was planned to work alongside RRW from pretty early days but unfortunately nothing has come of it yet. I don't recall a definitive position on what was to be done with the existing railyard textures but lot textures in general were intended to be upgraded to RRW spec to facilitate the continued use of all the old stations and such. Since upgrading the NCD textures does nothing to prevent more ideal and fully RRW-compliant textures being made later I think it only makes sense to do. A lot or perhaps the majority of the textures don't break the turning radii limits and the 4-track-per-tile system might even be ideal for RRW yards. The alternative of 3 tracks per tile was what we had planned on for RRW yards but it borders on unrealistically spread out and existing automata seems to more or less universally support the 4 track system. 7 tracks per 2 tiles might be the most realistic solution but would require a significant amount of extra complexity.
One question/suggestion from me: would it make sense to have the save "x" switch geometry in railyards that is used with those STR switch textures recently shown?
It is with great pleasure that I move this fantastic development thread to the Of Special Interest This Month section for the special month of November, SC4Devotion's birthday month. Let us all have a fantastic month in the presence of the finest Modder, Congratulations, eggman121!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi901.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fac213%2FBSCLEX%2FRRW-test_zpslsvye82i.jpg&hash=784e2a343545178f95cbc2dde5d032081e5bee18)
Wow!can't wait to see what's going on ;) maybe something on the ERRW? :P
Amazing, I'm not a railroad guy and I can't wait to use these gems in my future cities. I'm back to Simcity 4 :D
Looks like I've missed too much while I was enjoying Cities Skylines, for some reason, that game doesn't have THAT thing SC4 has until now :0
Congrats Eggman!!! Well deserved! &apls &apls &apls
Thanks for all the enthusiasm and excitement about the new workings ;D
Here is a video That I made which showcases the FlexTrack in a City Environment. This is to make up for the inaction on my part for the OSITM this year.
https://www.youtube.com/v/XcCTIddGNW4
Thanks for all the kind words :)
-eggman121
Nice video! This could also double as a city tour that could be posted in your MD if you want.
My jaw has just dropped!!!!
Neat video, Eggman.. I'm excited to test this new Flextrack once it has been made available... :)
Any chance for the overhead lines to follow not too long after? It's really a shame to see some nice tracks without any electrification.. :/
Fantastic video !! Your work with RRW is amazing, I can't imagine how big is your dedication creating textures, testing, modding, etc... Thanks :thumbsup:
Congrats on the OSITM. &apls This is a great project. I'm looking forward to using it eventually.
I have to say, the video from Eggman is marvelous; it's like having an extensive N-gauge model railroad without the ridiculous expense and space issues. Bravo!
Thanks for all the kind reply's :)
Here is another FlexTrack piece that is in development.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FA2%2520Diagonal%2520Turnout_zpsv9zhd8tm.jpg&hash=ad51163ec4afc1a073047589cd638e3b601c22e2) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/A2%20Diagonal%20Turnout_zpsv9zhd8tm.jpg.html)
Finally found a way to make an A2 diagonal Turnout.
There will be more diagonal pieces coming along in the future.
-eggman121
Ooh, awesome! I haven't even had much of a chance to use the publicly-released FlexTrack yet! (been busy building an interchange, as you can see in my MD)
I love the new flextrack system, but I've just realized that we don't have STR-Elevated AVE/Road ect overpass puzzlepieces jet. Is there any chance a dragable elevated rail system (in a "near" future release) or STR - EL AVE/Road overpasses?
By the way I love this new flex track system. It's much more easier after you know the paterns, however I saw in a previously released video some kind of R4-R3 compound Turnout, which I can not make that way that I saw in the video, it might be unreleased in the NAM 33.
But Thank you for your all work!!!
Tyberius
The flextrack just keeps getting better! Who needs a model railroad when we have SC4?
Quote from: Simcoug on December 16, 2015, 06:46:09 PM
The flextrack just keeps getting better! Who needs a model railroad when we have SC4?
That's Right ;D . Realistic Railroads for SC4 is fantastic on many levels since it saves space and your pocket. I mean. Who really has space for a large scale HO railroad and who has the money to make the tracks that are replicate able in SC4. I don't, That's why I am working on the FlexTrack ;)
Anyway here is a new teaser!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FDiagonal%2520Dual%2520Crossover%2520DTR_zpspyqcr2kn.jpg&hash=43adc2f3554ef712d8dde6646dc47d7897251e53) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Diagonal%20Dual%20Crossover%20DTR_zpspyqcr2kn.jpg.html)
Like the Orthogonal counterpart the pieces are symmetrical. As such the same pieces can be used to make such a piece.
-eggman121
OMG!This is awesome!!!! &apls There will almost be no difference between diagonal and orthogonal in the end! &apls &apls
Quote from: eggman121 on November 22, 2015, 06:24:56 PM
Thanks for all the enthusiasm and excitement about the new workings ;D
Here is a video That I made which showcases the FlexTrack in a City Environment. This is to make up for the inaction on my part for the OSITM this year.
https://www.youtube.com/v/XcCTIddGNW4
Thanks for all the kind words :)
-eggman121
Oh my goobers. I feel an old addiction of mine rearing its head &apls &apls &apls
Will need to check this thread in detail!! Thank you Stephen.
Cheers
Willy
I never gave railways much attention, but now... Oh yes! :thumbsup: &apls
Quote from: Swordmaster on December 17, 2015, 07:32:00 AM
Quote from: eggman121 on November 22, 2015, 06:24:56 PM
Thanks for all the enthusiasm and excitement about the new workings ;D
Here is a video That I made which showcases the FlexTrack in a City Environment. This is to make up for the inaction on my part for the OSITM this year.
[snip]
Thanks for all the kind words :)
-eggman121
Oh my goobers. I feel an old addiction of mine rearing its head &apls &apls &apls
Will need to check this thread in detail!! Thank you Stephen.
Cheers
Willy
Wow, good to see you back, Willy!
Willy are you back on RRW and Sim City? :)
From reading the RRW manual, I understand you can't place diagonals immediately adjacent to each other as was possible with the standard Maxis tracks, but that there were plans, however, for a 3 and 4 track dragable? Has this been done? Or has the ability to place diagonal tracks immediately next to each other been solved?
Quote from: mr_overthinkthings on December 19, 2015, 07:33:32 PM
3 and 4 track dragable? Has this been done? Or has the ability to place diagonal tracks immediately next to each other been solved?
There are plans for possible 3 and 4 track rail in the future. There is no plan to restore the double-diagonal track ability.
Quote from: eggman121 on December 16, 2015, 08:35:09 PM
That's Right ;D . Realistic Railroads for SC4 is fantastic on many levels since it saves space and your pocket. I mean. Who really has space for a large scale HO railroad and who has the money to make the tracks that are replicate able in SC4.
I actually had one of those before I moved away from home. ;D Several moves, a wife and two kids later, and all the components are all torn up.
Quote from: Gugu3 on December 17, 2015, 02:53:16 PM
Willy are you back on RRW and Sim City? :)
Definitely. First order of business will be to cover the gaps.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FqoQJLuh.jpg&hash=1323aa96fe49e97a4aa2eed2616e82d0e6159905)
Cheers
Willy
Oooh, nice.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FWH9TrT9.jpg&hash=6803be2aac6844fc55e46b1735bbba515f3f2c1c)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0JwxRX2.jpg&hash=3d7f36768a810065727a093e3aac8bcaf7e43723)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUOaF13P.jpg&hash=f48207986d3687337fc8360d30065c9887b0e1c0)
Cheers
Willy
Brilliant! TULEP/RRW crossings are something I have not seen before.
The texture of the slabs is excellent!
Great to see you back on this!With you and eggman on board we can expect great things!And with Alex working on the TuLEP it is even better :thumbsup:
Looks nice, but on some of the avenue RR crossing TuLEPs, stop lines are missing in the direction heading away from the intersection. Might be nice to add those.
Quote from: Vizoria on January 17, 2016, 01:55:39 PM
Brilliant! TULEP/RRW crossings are something I have not seen before.
They've existed for 8 months, hidden away inside my Automated Sidewalk Mod preview. Although Willy has done a much better job of the textures :thumbsup:
Thanks everyone!
Quote from: Vizoria on January 17, 2016, 01:55:39 PM
Brilliant! TULEP/RRW crossings are something I have not seen before.
The wide NWM networks were default rail as well ;D
Quote from: compdude787 on January 17, 2016, 02:40:58 PM
Looks nice, but on some of the avenue RR crossing TuLEPs, stop lines are missing in the direction heading away from the intersection. Might be nice to add those.
That's an interesting technicality that I was wondering about. From what I know, stop lights can be integrated with the crossing signals. So if the crossing is closed, the light will remain red, meaning there's no cars cueing up there. Now this is an interesting setup I made (unconsciously), since there's a slip lane as well to account for. I'm gonna mull this one over.
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on January 17, 2016, 02:52:54 PM
From what I know, stop lights can be integrated with the crossing signals. So if the crossing is closed, the light will remain red, meaning there's no cars cueing up there.
Oh, right. Forgot about that...
Very cool development. Nice to see you on board again, Willy! :)
Are these the crossing signals that "jondor" originally started a couple of years ago? This all looks AWESOME! I had a computer crash, and also lost my SC4... but a new copy is actually arriving tomorrow. I'm really looking forward to getting to use everything that's been worked on in the last few NAM versions. I think it's about time to get ready to donate to the community :)
Thanks everyone. Indeed, fgossage, I've been shamelessly plugging Jondor's crossings. I seem to recall there were certain peculiarities needed with the paths to get them to work properly, but I haven't experienced any problems yet.
I've rounded up all orthogonal NWM crossings. To further illustrate the less-than-straightforward application of stop lines, the OWR crossings have none at all:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FRVdRR4D.jpg&hash=d15869a04ad5a26a66c671030d12078bfb3e4539)
This is for technical reasons (1/ the crossings don't know in which direction the OWR runs, and 2/ the OWR-4 and -5 textures are mirrored). I could also make stop lines on either side, but that looks much worse, in my opinion.
I'm now (that's tomorrow) gonna see if I can still RUL ;D and get the STR crossings in order.
Cheers
Willy
I read somewhere also that Jondor's crossings were incompatible with RRW, which they most definitely are not.
I wonder if perhaps barriers don't time correctly with some crossings, due to the lack of/faulty stop points in the pathing? Other than that, I'm lost as to how the two would be in any way linked?
While Willy is at work with the crossings I have ventured into a FARR away land :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR_2_FAR_3_zpscp8ap7ca.jpg&hash=2c512455961a47f1ead6f7723f0a0901a80e8498) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR_2_FAR_3_zpscp8ap7ca.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFARR_Work_zpskmiqj13c.jpg&hash=9a9d8f1ac70e981b7f2753371afa6685f5d68bc2) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FARR_Work_zpskmiqj13c.jpg.html)
Still a bit loose with the RUL2 code but we are getting there. There is more coming to FARR land ;D
-eggman121
Let me make sure I have everything straight, after reading this entire thread to catch up. I've been gone for a couple of years, apart from checking in briefly on the forum overall once or twice, and quite a LOT has happened since then. :)
- The crossing signals created by Jondor were at least initially incompatible (at least not consistently compatible across the board) because of some of the internal coding related to how they were initially created versus the internal coding associated with the RRW project?
- Eggman121 would be able to fix it so that Jondor's crossing signals would be compatible consistently with RRW-based highway grade crossings by editing that internal coding (I think associated with the T21 coding)?
- These are the compatibility issues that mgb204 referenced a couple of posts up?
- Swordmaster, it seems you are going back as a part of the grade crossing work with the RRW project, and making the RRW-based crossings consistently compatible with Jondor's signals... or are you guys folding Jondor's signals into the NAM (possibly as a subset of the RRW) and updating the coding to make them compatible that way?
Unrelated note: Eggman121, sorry for disappearing for so long. I'm consistently back in the community now, and if you would still like help with U.S.A. related portions of your Traffic Sign Mod, please feel free to contact me whenever you are ready! :)
Nice, looking forward to using this in the next NAM version. :thumbsup:
What was that people said about SC4 not having curvy networks? :D
I'm hoping this level of greatness can be expanded to some of the car-based networks at some point.
Quote from: fgossage on January 17, 2016, 08:08:20 PM
- The crossing signals created by Jondor were at least initially incompatible (at least not consistently compatible across the board) because of some of the internal coding related to how they were initially created versus the internal coding associated with the RRW project?
Were they though, I've not noticed any of them missing or functioning incorrectly. That said I'm not partial to at-grade crossings, so I don't see too many of them. T21's are linked to the IDs of the network, since those have not been modified (for the crossings at least), there is no reason I can think of why they would not appear. As mentioned before, the only issue I can envision is with the barrier animation not syncing or happening as a result of the paths which are linked to this effect. If you can give me an example of a crossing that's not functioning as it should, it's something that could be looked into. I'm not sure if that's something that comes under the realm of NAM development. Anyone is free to make new T21s based on the props and release them, but that's only required for unsupported crossings. I said it earlier, but if we bundled everything into the NAM, it would be overwhelming.
Double D dangarang
Quote from: eggman121 on January 17, 2016, 06:59:19 PM
While Willy is at work with the crossings I have ventured into a FARR away land :D
<snip>
Still a bit loose with the RUL2 code but we are getting there. There is more coming to FARR land ;D
-eggman121
FARR out man!
FARR2 and FARR3, and FARR crossovers and switches? Beautiful!
Guys you keep this game amazing with all of your creations! &apls &apls
I can't keep up! Help! ()what()
But hey: &apls &apls
Smooth curves... bah humbug!
Give me back my 90 degree rail curves!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdosomegames.com%2FImages%2FScreenshots%2FSimCityScreen01.png&hash=0e5fad2f7f4a5ea9ced369e96d5a83671203743b)
:P
For the NWM at least, there are no problems with Jondor's crossings... Robin is right in that it has to do with stop points in the paths, but while some paths have them and some don't, all crossings close and open well in time. So that's that. Jondor was one of those NAMites whose contributions were always of the highest standard, and the crossings prove that. I've always had a fondness for his work and it's a pity he's no longer an active part of the team.
Now, STRxNWM is done. Looks like some of my initial STR code was faulty, hence why the wider networks revert to DTR in the current NAM. That's fixed as well.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUFcyaNj.jpg&hash=37d9834546ac8ce0cb436d3cbe64adf8f34d7125)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FR9V2287.jpg&hash=405e336d0cc7d6bee9924daebdacff100a0002e0)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYZPVnOu.jpg&hash=574dc84ad448be66bb668d2cb48579473aeb70d1)
Cheers
Willy
All of these crossings look great! It's super exciting to see compatibility for RRW being extended to everything. It does look like there's one texture error in the picture though: the STR crossing for the NRD-4 network doesn't have the darker strips (in the middle of each lane) covering the concrete between the two rails like the other networks do.
Oops! Good catch. Wonderful to know you folks see all the details :thumbsup:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FFm8hGvU.jpg&hash=9cb3c8c24345426aa3a29ee8615df4f27621a9a9)
Cheers
Willy
Lots of exciting stuff!
STR users everywhere are jumping up and down right now ;D
&hlp
()stsfd()
It still AMAZES me how creative thinkers are breaking the GRID barrier. The only limitation that really bothered me is straight and diagonal roads/highways. NOW, even wider roads and FARR both Highway, roads and NOW rail is really making the game even more and more attractive.
We should ALL be soooo thankful that this game is not given up on and forgotten over the past 13 years and a HUGE thank you coming from DIE HARD SC4 players such as my self.
Quote from: Simcoug on January 18, 2016, 12:20:56 PM
STR users everywhere are jumping up and down right now ;D
For me FlexTrack really started me off with this network, the usefulness of dragable overrides direct from DTR cannot be understated, not to mention how stable it makes STR in practise. Maybe needs some improvement in terms of intersecting with other networks though.
Quote from: mgb204 on January 18, 2016, 01:22:06 PM
For me FlexTrack really started me off with this network, the usefulness of draggable overrides direct from DTR cannot be understated, not to mention how stable it makes STR in practice. Maybe needs some improvement in terms of intersecting with other networks though.
There are plans for extended STR overrides to make it more stable. Some coding including the connection between two pieces are on the cards as are the FARR STR and R4 and R5 STR curves.
Having
Willy back is an absolute blessing! Even if it is for a small period of time.
FlexTrack is due to be rapidly expanded with new track pieces and functionality. But that won't happen overnight.
All the comments I feel are really encouraging and I am so glad the creations are making people happy :)
I think for SC4 and in RL there is a shift to mass transit and I am glad to be on board for the ride!
-eggman121
Incredible, incredible stuff! It seems soon all networks will be draggable and need only starter pieces to get going. This will finally complete wealth tile unification and/or $/$$/$$$ tile consistency across all transport networks.
Speaking of stable coding...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FJe8iMsM.jpg&hash=75fdf96514bf99980d39a95146ddc79cc31178f2)
This took me a while to figure out. The original RAM included only three STRxSAM crossings, so I had to wade through the RAM IIDs to find some new spots for the rest. And update the T21s ;)
There's a decent amount of stability on either side of the crossing, as per your usual NAM standards ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9Gju7RF.jpg&hash=b60fb4e0634a931bc26c30f4b74e1c5c5ab9009d)
I should probably add wooden beams to the two dirt crossings. This way it isn't very convenient to get across the rails.
Cheers
Willy
That is great!Willy are you back just for a short period of time? &mmm
The recent development here is stunning! Between the improved/expanded NWMxRRW and draggable FARRW, I'm really looking forward to playing around with everything that'll be in NAM 35. I just hope that draggable $Network$xFARRW at-grade crossings are in the works as well - not to mention elevated $Network$xFARRW crossings (maybe in NAM 36)?
Don't worry Gugu, the specifics of why I wasn't around don't apply anymore. Just regular RL may pop in now and then.
As for FARR crossings, that will depend on when the base is done. I'm gonna let Stephen do his work first, rather than have us both get mixed up right now. Coding is hard enough as it is. But long-term, we'll make as many crossings as technically possible.
Cheers
Willy
The RRW development looks amazing! Thanks for all your hard work. I was wondering, is there's any way to get the RRW to cooperate with the Diagonal Bridge Enabler?
Great to know Willy!With you and Stephan together we can just expect amazing things to come :thumbsup:
Awesome work... &apls
Quote from: selles on January 19, 2016, 01:41:13 AM
The RRW development looks amazing! Thanks for all your hard work. I was wondering, is there's any way to get the RRW to cooperate with the Diagonal Bridge Enabler?
The textures should show RRW on the bridges (that fix should be in NAM 33). But I can't draw a DBE when RRW is installed in my plugins folder. The workaround I've been using is to switch to a non-RRW setup to get the bridge in place. The problem with that, if you save whilst RRW-Only content has been plopped, you may find you need to rebuild it when returning from using the DBE. Therefore this is best done at an early stage of development. The DBE, renamed the ABE (Advanced Bridge Enabler) will be updated eventually, at that point hopefully this will be unnecessary.
Is there a reason why RRW doesn't currently work with the DBE?
Is it the model based network, or is there some hidden slope coding preventing it from working?
Quote from: APSMS on January 19, 2016, 11:53:55 AM
Is there a reason why RRW doesn't currently work with the DBE?
Is it the model based network, or is there some hidden slope coding preventing it from working?
None of those. It is actually because the RRW uses a different IID base. So the DBE is referencing the Maxis Rail Base while the RRW Diagonal Base is different. We should put it on the list of things to fix up for NAM 35.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on January 19, 2016, 11:58:16 AM
Quote from: APSMS on January 19, 2016, 11:53:55 AM
Is there a reason why RRW doesn't currently work with the DBE?
Is it the model based network, or is there some hidden slope coding preventing it from working?
None of those. It is actually because the RRW uses a different IID base. So the DBE is referencing the Maxis Rail Base while the RRW Diagonal Base is different. We should put it on the list of things to fix up for NAM 35.
-eggman121
I think the problem is there, if we change the IDs, then the DBE won't work for legacy users. So such a change needs to be managed to ensure it only overrides the DBE if RRW is installed. Is this reference in the NAM or within the DBE package? If it's the later, we'll need to offer users the choice somehow.
There's nothing in the process of making an IID able to support what's needed for DBE/ABE functionality that requires it be one or the other. We can simply add the necessary exemplars for RRW and leave the Maxis Rail ones in as well, without issue.
The Rail exemplars are in the actual DBE file, however, as having them outside the temporary files was found to cause sidewalks to show up on the ends of Rail bridges.
-Alex
Thanks Alex.
Stick the attached file in the DBE folder and it will enable RRW support. It's a temporary patch until the new release.
Actually, the models for the first bridge have already been updated a while ago (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15156.msg473135#msg473135), though the paths still need to be fixed.
Cheers
Willy
Thanks everyone for all your responses, and thank you mgb204 for the patch! I'll go give it a try.
RUL magic...
Before:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQzIrkOF.jpg&hash=5fce3397aefbf07812f6e21b98d8da24526d0dc7)
After:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FPr0KP0P.jpg&hash=fc915a8ece8acc20a5c5a76493d65347667b3a9f)
Cheers
Willy
That is great Willy! &apls
Just curiosity other than a request...Any news on the ERRW front?What's the plan for it?
Sorry for asking but this project is just amazing and makes me think of all the different possibilities... ::)
Quote from: Gugu3 on January 21, 2016, 03:24:23 PM
That is great Willy! &apls
Just curiosity other than a request...Any news on the ERRW front?What's the plan for it?
Sorry for asking but this project is just amazing and makes me think of all the different possibilities... ::)
I think I will answer this one. We are still at the planning stages for the ERRW. That being said they won't appear until post NAM 35.
The reasons I give are Crosslinkage, Models, and of course the RUL2 code that is needed. There are a bit of mechanics behind ERRW that still need to be figured out.
I want them just as badly but I guess once we have the level crossings done we can think about how the ERRW will work in practice.
-eggman121
Just Double posting ::)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FCrossover_Turnout_OxD_zps3ppnqsrt.jpg&hash=f51ae634ec73a90089acade4805ea50800212ed5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/Crossover_Turnout_OxD_zps3ppnqsrt.jpg.html)
New functionality will come to the base FlexTrack in the next NAM if everything goes well.
-eggman121
Nice!!
OMG!great stuff.
Thanks for the reply Stephen!Mine was just curiosity...I am more than happy with the amazing L0 RRW fletracks. I imagine whenever you guys are gonna tackle the L1 or L2 RRW we can expect great surprises....
The recent development is really cool!
The symmetry is strong with this one...
Again incredible work!
Amazing, just TOTALLY AMAZING. Would ABSOLUTELY LOVE to see a connector piece that connects from L2 rail to NAM Elevated rail.
When your network covers the whole tile, of course your concrete slabs have to be cut off at an unnatural point. :(
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F1eixUp8.jpg&hash=5ed0bf38188070c67d0934a0ea9eaf9087934c34)
Or don't they?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOJ3LmBs.jpg&hash=4772189d808885fad3149a6308d79cb11cfa896d)
Aha! ;D
Cheers
Willy
PS: Does not even involve RULs. Aha!!
Overhanging model-based crossings? A little T21 magic, perhaps?
Nice!!
Viaducts, anyone?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F8PVAsYg.jpg&hash=d3e5bb6f12765f022ff04b8ef49d84a1fc397872)
Models by Arne (vester).
Quote from: APSMS on January 23, 2016, 05:17:36 PMA little T21 magic, perhaps?
Exactly! A trick (one of many) I learnt from memo back in the day.
Cheers
Willy
Finally!!! &apls
Excellent!!! &apls &apls &apls
Great job!They look awesome! &apls
Just a stunning two day :o
+ :squirrel:
Quote from: Swordmaster on January 27, 2016, 01:12:56 PM
Viaducts, anyone?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F8PVAsYg.jpg&hash=d3e5bb6f12765f022ff04b8ef49d84a1fc397872)
Great progress. &apls
Will go over the models, so the arches get the right textures attached.
Great work guys &apls
It's great to see so much happening here lately :thumbsup:
Nice! :thumbsup: &apls &apls &apls &apls
Thanks folks. Some more of that stuff:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYrAD2gk.jpg&hash=c0e0d0ca734b4d9ae13134582649dab3efc74d10)
Bonus:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNEJocab.jpg&hash=5f1f0b5af0e0ec5f9fdf10811c4ffb21b1044dd3)
Cheers
Willy
Wait, is it draggable now? Either way, that's awesome! :thumbsup: &apls &apls &apls :D
Very cool, I suspect I'll be using a lot more rail viaducts in the near future.
Are these new ones going to remain compatible with existing texture overrides, such as those in RUM for RRW/NAM? I hope so, but either way with Willy and Stephen both at full steam on RRW, we are being very spoiled by the amount of new developments recently. Thanks for all the hard work :thumbsup:.
The madman is back! Awesome to see you dive headfirst back into it Willy &apls
Quote from: mgb204 on January 31, 2016, 12:52:55 AM
Very cool, I suspect I'll be using a lot more rail viaducts in the near future.
Are these new ones going to remain compatible with existing texture overrides, such as those in RUM for RRW/NAM? I hope so, but either way with Willy and Stephen both at full steam on RRW, we are being very spoiled by the amount of new developments recently. Thanks for all the hard work :thumbsup:.
I believe the plan has always been to make a totally new IID scheme for draggable rail viaducts. So, as-is, the RUM wouldn't automatically override the new viaducts. Plus new textures would have to be made for all the new pieces of course!
But the models of the viaducts haven't changed theme, so it's just a matter of porting it all over and doing a little editing for the new pieces. Rivit did a fantastically quick job when the RRW first went public, so I have faith. ()stsfd()
Wow, that's an impressive night's work :D Loving these so far!
Once conductor Willy's train picks up steam, there's no stopping him. Let's ride the rails to spectacular new lands! Great job! :thumbsup:
Fantastic!!!!!
Well...um...wow... :shocked2:
I suppose I better let this cat out of its bag.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l0NwSlckZKWebj2Wk/giphy.gif)
So yeah, draggable. Although in adjacency situations like the above, you don't even have to drag (same as with the road viaducts: instant override). No regular starters so far, only OnSlope Transitions (OSTs). I hope there will be enough stability that the "stub" starters are not necessary. The offset is that there will be diagonal OSTs (as above) from the get go.
However, major point:
there will be no height transitions.
I will be clear on this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEkkm7zV.jpg&hash=76b2ec3a101bf6bed24deb5ffc2fb674301fda73)
A steep rail line (say, 2%) needs 775m, or approx. 50 tiles to gain 15.5m height. And that's a
steep line where usually (in RL) specific regulations apply and reduced loads are required.
Quote from: mgb204 on January 31, 2016, 12:52:55 AMAre these new ones going to remain compatible with existing texture overrides, such as those in RUM for RRW/NAM?
The additional viaducts use the same set of textures as the existing ones, so theoretically Ron's viaducts are instantly compatible. However, I've noticed he added a yellow stripe along the edgebeams (the texture covering the top). The way Arne UV-wrapped the models, part of this stripe becomes visible. If the models stay this way, I'll get in touch with Ron--it's only a minor fix that I've already applied myself:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSxSxxYG.jpg&hash=f5e15b85dc01762ef1471646b459694b37903e93)
Cheers
Willy
This is awesome Willy!Draggable ERRW is incredible &apls
Are you planning to make L1 ERRW at some point?great work so far &apls &apls
I was trying RRW for the first time only shortly ago in a new region, after getting some peeks here and there in the forum, and I must say it became a favorite of mine easily. At first, I was unsure about the brown-ish look (there was much discussion about this in the past, apparently), but I must say I got used to it quickly, and it fits into the game rather nicely. Making most of the stuff draggable, in conjunction with the FLEX approach (I still have to learn how to apply all those overrides, though), looks very promising, and it's a lot of fun to lay out new rail lines, even in difficult terrain. :)
Getting draggable viaducts is another feature that was long overdue, and thus the latest development is very exciting alright! I take the viaduct ramp will be kept as "legacy" item, but it won't be included in the draggable RRW approach due to the nature of realistic railways? Granted, main lines usually don't have slopes larger than 2-4%, with the occasional 8% in some mountainous regions; that actually means a realistic transition could be about 10-12 tiles long, but obviously, that's still a bit impractical. For the sake of usuability in the game, I'd say the existing ramp isn't that bad, though. ;)
Anyway, I'll monitor the progress of this project closely, esp. since I use railway in virtually any of my cities, and watching some of the demo videos gave us the perfect impression of a virtual model railroad. Surely uncovers some fond memories of my childhood alright when I was admiring with my dad's H0 trains! The rail catenaries that eggman121 was showing look super awesome, too, and knowing how fussy T21 exemplars can be sometimes, my hat goes off for exploring that field as well. :)
One thing I was wondering about: Will there be a RRW lot texture pack for the popular rail textures by North Country Dude? I see that Simmer2 released a huge load of new textures, but that would mean to re-lot everything. I know that RRW features different curve radii an all, but maybe some adaption could be made. There are a few other textures that don't seem to be covered yet, too, like the diagonal switches on the Maxis Large Railway Station, and Marrast's diagonal stations.
Seems like you're back on the good tracks, Willy...... ::)
That was lame, I know.
All of NCD and I belive some oh PEG's legacy tracks will be color matched to the RRW standard.
Eggman121 is overseeing the transition.
I could easily make the transition points between the legacy textures and RRW standards but then every lot ever made with those textures would have to be put through LE and re-uploaded.
Simmer2
Quote from: Simmer2 on January 31, 2016, 02:03:07 PM
All of NCD and I belive some oh PEG's legacy tracks will be color matched to the RRW standard.
Eggman121 is overseeing the transition.
I could easily make the transition points between the legacy textures and RRW standards but then every lot ever made with those textures would have to be put through LE and re-uploaded.
I will try to find some time but at the moment I am quite busy. I have not thought of PEG's tracks yet. I think you where referring to the WMP tracks which will be updated. This process will take some time however.
-eggman121
Noahclem already started the WMP textures. In fact the few done were uploaded as an additional, optional file in mu Japanese Train Station pack on the LEX. I'd advise to talk to him about it and about taking over the development of them etc.
Doo-bee-doo-bee-doo. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgpKpfTZ.jpg&hash=af742eafd793bad013e78a6e5e275ac4f2a428eb)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9LvPoIx.jpg&hash=38f5289e793e0709aa533a1e0bf6c39ad7787326)
Cheers
Willy
Awesome :bnn: :bnn:
Lol at the Minions reference!
This is the real deal here! :thumbsup:
So it is draggable!!! Awesome!! &apls &apls &apls &apls x9015
Will catch that Willy - I had put that colour on a long time back to mark how much was actually used in the UV mapping on the originals for some experiments I tried. I've already done the pieces you mentioned earlier for the diagonal bridges and I'll track back for this (sorry) - as you say not difficult.
BTW have you settled the configurations and IIDs of the SAM crossings you will include. An example set or picture list for say SAM2 would be extremely useful as I've 5 SAMS of my own to adjust. Also if there are any new ones for normal streets. Do you need any production texture work for the official ones?
Given the progress you've made recently, in the new RUM for RRW I will be removing content that concerns all crossings not of my texture sets, all previous pathing fixes and texture fixes. That leaves my under textures, crossings, viaduct textures, bridge textures, FLUPS and interim Catenary T21s. Does that gel with your expectations of NAM35 content?
I also have defined 4 new bridges that need to be included in various RUL and INI files so cannot include those in my mod...
cheers Ron
Quote from: Andreas on January 31, 2016, 11:32:13 AMGetting draggable viaducts is another feature that was long overdue, and thus the latest development is very exciting alright! I take the viaduct ramp will be kept as "legacy" item, but it won't be included in the draggable RRW approach due to the nature of realistic railways? Granted, main lines usually don't have slopes larger than 2-4%, with the occasional 8% in some mountainous regions; that actually means a realistic transition could be about 10-12 tiles long, but obviously, that's still a bit impractical. For the sake of usuability in the game, I'd say the existing ramp isn't that bad, though. ;)
Hi Andreas, thanks for the endorsement!
We can talk about the gradients for ever, though. I don't think we should bother with what we're doing--any of us--if we're gonna keep placing the viaduct ramp. It may seem innocent to the untrained eye, but it's easily the most unrealistic thing that has ever been made for this game. Probably beats Maxis Highway with a factor of 872. All the RHW interchanges, wide curves, diagonal bridges, terrain mods, fantastic BATs and custom lots in the world can't save a city or picture that has this piece in it.
Quote from: Simmer2 on January 31, 2016, 05:55:14 PMAwesome :bnn: :bnn:
Lol at the Minions reference!
Minions? Had to google that.
Please!http://www.youtube.com/v/hlSbSKNk9f0
Quote from: rivit on January 31, 2016, 10:05:55 PM
Will catch that Willy - I had put that colour on a long time back to mark how much was actually used in the UV mapping on the originals for some experiments I tried. I've already done the pieces you mentioned earlier for the diagonal bridges and I'll track back for this (sorry) - as you say not difficult.
BTW have you settled the configurations and IIDs of the SAM crossings you will include. An example set or picture list for say SAM2 would be extremely useful as I've 5 SAMS of my own to adjust. Also if there are any new ones for normal streets. Do you need any production texture work for the official ones?
Given the progress you've made recently, in the new RUM for RRW I will be removing content that concerns all crossings not of my texture sets, all previous pathing fixes and texture fixes. That leaves my under textures, crossings, viaduct textures, bridge textures, FLUPS and interim Catenary T21s. Does that gel with your expectations of NAM35 content?
I also have defined 4 new bridges that need to be included in various RUL and INI files so cannot include those in my mod...
cheers Ron
Thanks Ron. Will get back to you in PM when I have a definite answer to all of those. I'm still working on the SAM sets.
Cheers
Willy
Awesome work on these Willy &apls Exciting to see the STR start appearing!
Also neat to hear (and see) RUM integration coming along--I'm a big fan and consider the mod more or less mandatory at this point ;)
Quote from: art128 on January 31, 2016, 04:19:56 PM
Noahclem already started the WMP textures. In fact the few done were uploaded as an additional, optional file in mu Japanese Train Station pack on the LEX. I'd advise to talk to him about it and about taking over the development of them etc.
I have been working on various lot texture replacements here and there but am not sure the best way to release them. I don't really want to release them as their own set because it's not that big, other people have definitely been doing some of the same work independently, and it would be one more file for people to have to find to get stuff to work right. But not releasing it means it's mostly just sat on my computer when others could be using it. Back in September or October I sent Stephen all my files to incorporate in the NAM or in his own mod but I don't know if anything came of that. Anyway, I just checked the file, fixed it (I have a bad habit of using the wrong group ID with lot textures), and have one texture error to fix before I could just upload a quick link to it here in case someone would find them useful.
@Willy: Well yeah, in terms of realism, the ramp ist just silly - no need to discuss that. ;) But after all, it's a game, and some things tend to be unrealistic alright, so I'm prepared to sacrifice that now and then for playability (although I think I never used that ramp so far in my cities...).
@Noah: For a better RRW lot texture coverage in the NAM, I guess the most used textures might be enough (sidings, a handful of switches etc.), it's probably not necessary to cover every single rail texture that has been made so far, but the most popular ones that are used on many rail lots will do the trick already. :)
Willy,
ABSOLUTELY LOVE your work. One question:
With draggable capability with ERRW, then what about Neighbor Connections? Part of the MAIN reason I have been so wishing for a connector piece that connects the Maxis Elevated Rail to ERRW is the Neighbor Connections. If ERRW has such ability for neighbor connections, then the connector piece is not necessary.
I personally love ERRW with viaducts as they show up on the region view as rail and finally, the slope is not as great as rail is.
dyougyn
Love the STR! The work you do here is totally awesome. :bnn: :thumbsup: Will the new draggable viaducts, maybe, in the future, be overridable for STR? That would be just even more great! ;D
Quote from: dyoungyn on February 01, 2016, 09:50:41 AM
If ERRW has such ability for neighbor connections, then the connector piece is not necessary.
I think it already has, actually. Already now, straight viaduct puzzle pieces can be placed on top of straight ground heavy rail neighbour connections. For diagonals, I think this can be achieved by using the RHW disconnector tool.
... and who speaks about minions, it's a Baloo reference of course! :P
I believe this is the minions reference...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBekXg5LxSg
And it fits, because Willy, you are on FIRE ()flamdev()
Someone had better build a fire station next to that viaduct! :D Well, I've found myself increasingly using earth ramps as opposed to PP ramps for not only Rails but even networks like RHW-2 as of late, so I've already pretty much ceased using that Rail ramp.
I have been quite quiet in thread lately because of RL and to give my good friend Willy some airspace. I am so glad all of you are using the RRW and am pleased that this project is really kicking along.
So my good friends... Who wants to go down the FARR way! :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FThe%2520FARR%2520way_zps8fhn7rwn.jpg&hash=437463f569ef8738b7ea3a1c3af47ab39090f87f) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/The%20FARR%20way_zps8fhn7rwn.jpg.html)
There will be more in this space.
Lets play a game. Who would like to guess what new angles are in this curve ;D
-eggman121
Hmmm, looks like we now have FA-4 and FA-2. Wow, awesome!!!
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 01, 2016, 07:05:54 AM
Quote from: Andreas on January 31, 2016, 11:32:13 AMGetting draggable viaducts is another feature that was long overdue, and thus the latest development is very exciting alright! I take the viaduct ramp will be kept as "legacy" item, but it won't be included in the draggable RRW approach due to the nature of realistic railways? Granted, main lines usually don't have slopes larger than 2-4%, with the occasional 8% in some mountainous regions; that actually means a realistic transition could be about 10-12 tiles long, but obviously, that's still a bit impractical. For the sake of usuability in the game, I'd say the existing ramp isn't that bad, though. ;)
Hi Andreas, thanks for the endorsement!
We can talk about the gradients for ever, though. I don't think we should bother with what we're doing--any of us--if we're gonna keep placing the viaduct ramp. It may seem innocent to the untrained eye, but it's easily the most unrealistic thing that has ever been made for this game. Probably beats Maxis Highway with a factor of 872. All the RHW interchanges, wide curves, diagonal bridges, terrain mods, fantastic BATs and custom lots in the world can't save a city or picture that has this piece in it.
It would be nice to at least retain the original viaduct ramp for compatibility. Perhaps remove it from all the puzzle piece tab rings, but don't remove the actual piece, so that it will keep working in existing cities?
That's great!it's amazing to see all of this going on
Good one Stephen :thumbsup:
Quote from: Themistokles on February 01, 2016, 10:22:53 AMWill the new draggable viaducts, maybe, in the future, be overridable for STR? That would be just even more great! ;D
STR viaducts require a completely new set of models, which is undoubtedly no problem for Arne, but I also have to find time to implement them and write the code for it. It's unlikely it will be released at the same time as the DTR version (for which there is also no definite time schedule yet).
Quote... and who speaks about minions, it's a Baloo reference of course! :P[/size]
That's possible as well, though Sinatra is still more likely :D
Quote from: CasperVg on February 04, 2016, 01:00:16 AMIt would be nice to at least retain the original viaduct ramp for compatibility. Perhaps remove it from all the puzzle piece tab rings, but don't remove the actual piece, so that it will keep working in existing cities?
Backwards compatibility remains a main cornerstone of NAM policy, so there's absolutely no talk of removing the old piece--there just won't be a draggable version. As for the tab ring, I don't think at this moment anything will be changed about it. There will be a new button for the draggables, but I'm gonna keep my hands off the old one until it becomes an actual necessity to change it.
Cheers
Willy
&aplsWow, so much going on here. Great to see the draggable viaducts for rail. I was wondering (and I think I saw that someone else may have asked as well) if there is a plan to make rail viaducts at Level 1 (7.5m). This seems to be a more standard height in the US (Chicago, Philly, etc) for urban rails as well as commuter viaducts in suburban areas. It would also allow for shorter slope transitions. I know that this would probably be a massive amount of work, however. I really do think that what you've done here is fantastic. Keep up the great work!
Johnny
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 04, 2016, 07:37:34 AM
STR viaducts require a completely new set of models, which is undoubtedly no problem for Arne, but I also have to find time to implement them and write the code for it.
https://www.youtube.com/v/iTSIQPxAzfY
I'll have a look around on my PC and see if I still have the files.
Quote from: jdenm8 on February 04, 2016, 09:22:27 PM
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 04, 2016, 07:37:34 AM
STR viaducts require a completely new set of models, which is undoubtedly no problem for Arne, but I also have to find time to implement them and write the code for it.
https://www.youtube.com/v/iTSIQPxAzfY
I'll have a look around on my PC and see if I still have the files.
That would be amazing!jdenm8 are you back on track too??
Quote from: Gugu3 on February 05, 2016, 01:16:15 AM
That would be amazing!jdenm8 are you back on track too??
Nah. The STR Viaducts I have are remnants of the abandoned RAM Phase 2 dating from about 2009. What I have is very limited though, it's just Ortho, Diag, Curve and intersection models, a totally complete set of LHD paths (for what existed) and a mostly complete set of RHD paths. I think Superhands did up some more models, but he never uploaded them at the time from what I could see.
Something for our SAM lovers. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fp2mOOhx.jpg&hash=4d2d11dbf069976e9db69a6a58ab48915dad7340)
Preparing for the STR crossings, I've first added a good bit of stability to that part of the SAM code.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeruivGz.jpg&hash=3e3cf7f1e8fda9713b828acbf9957b6339f28b2e)
Now for the STR overrides :laugh:
Cheers
Willy
What can I say... RRW gets better by the day hour! &apls
Excellent!!!
Great work &apls Love the usage of the creepy nod and smile emoticon ;D
The SAM crossings look great :thumbsup:
Quote from: eggman121 on February 03, 2016, 06:33:22 PM
Lets play a game. Who would like to guess what new angles are in this curve ;D
FARR-2 and FARR-6?
Quote from: Swordmaster on January 31, 2016, 10:22:15 AM
However, major point: there will be no height transitions.
I will be clear on this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEkkm7zV.jpg&hash=76b2ec3a101bf6bed24deb5ffc2fb674301fda73)
Noooooo!!!! Don't do that :o
I am the mayor, I make the laws, why have I to comply with others rules? XD if a mayor wants a step height transition, let it be :P
Otherwise Will, Awesome job you have been doing! &apls &apls
I do worry, whilst a focus on realism is something many crave, the more casual user might be put off RRW by such inflexibility. I agree using them generally ruins a scene and that on-slopes are a better solution. But, many players aren't interested in making everything realistic, they are just playing a game. As such, they just want an easy way to make crossing with other networks. I guarantee if you don't include them, TE versions will inevitably pop up to fill the void. If the models already exist, wouldn't it be better to keep the whole system network based too?
He's not going to delete that piece, but simply there will be no support for the draggable network for that piece. You'll still be free to plop it as you may.
That's what I understood.
Quote from: mgb204 on February 07, 2016, 02:07:12 AM
I do worry, whilst a focus on realism is something many crave, the more casual user might be put off RRW by such inflexibility. I agree using them generally ruins a scene and that on-slopes are a better solution. But, many players aren't interested in making everything realistic, they are just playing a game. As such, they just want an easy way to make crossing with other networks. I guarantee if you don't include them, TE versions will inevitably pop up to fill the void. If the models already exist, wouldn't it be better to keep the whole system network based too?
is not just about making it realistic, is about making choices. Same this happened with RHW, where you can barely make any interchange the size of Maxis ones, though, although some may argue that is not, they have realistic sizes, because I can find here is Pt many interchanges of that size. and if it exists in RL, then its realistic :p
I just hope the same won't happen to RRW. And for Art says, maybe it wont :)
I think the difference for me between RRW and RHW here, RHW is totally optional. When you decide to install it, you are making a decision not to use the Maxis Highway and it's interchanges. In fact, even that's not strictly true, since you can still use MHW along side it. It's also worth noting, the nearest thing to a pre-fab RHW interchange is from the MHO. Such pieces are simply too much work to realise. RHW never took anything away, it just did things differently, such pieces never existed to begin with.
RRW is intended to replace rail in the NAM. Sure, it's still always going to be optional, but any user wanting the advanced functionality for Rail, must have RRW installed or they will be left behind. If we want as many users on board with this as possible, then we need to be thinking about the bigger picture and not dictating what RRW can and can't include for the sake of realism. Realism is a decision by the player, not something that the game/NAM should dictate.
mgb204,
It is better not to say! &apls &apls &apls
The last thing said by the guy making all this stuff was that the existing piece would stay. You would think that would be the end of the conversation, but you would of course be wrong. Five of the last six comments have complained about a piece disappearing that is not going to disappear
Several months ago when Stephen started getting really prolific with his flex curves there was a big burst of complaining from people wanting his work but not wanting it the way he was doing it (as part of RRW). While the vast majority of people stayed out or tried to offer something polite and constructive some people refused to accept Stephen's decision on the matter until he threatened to quit. Fortunately no one is threatening to quit at this time but this pattern of repeated and somehow self-righteous complaining about the developers needs to stop. This site exists and has its focus on developers because of the way developers were being treated elsewhere. If this kind of thing is happening over and over here then we've really lost our raison d'etre.
I'm sorry Noah, but who is complaining exactly? I read some general discussion and peoples opinions. I understand the puzzle piece will remain.
I know it's really tough to be a developer recently, you're preaching to the choir here. But I've not seen any behaviour or comments here that would warrant moderation or speaking to anyone? Ultimately part of the development process, especially if you make it public is such feedback. As a creator, it's your job to decide what direction to take, even if that doesn't fit with the feelings of others. No one is trying to muscle in and demand anything, we are just looking to have our feelings heard on the matter, nothing more.
Nobody really complained, but it's more the fact that you continued discussing this that is a bit dangerous.
Think about it this way, the last time such a discussion emerged it pushed Stephen to almost completely quit the project and stop doing any SC4 related work altogether. I know it's not your intention, of course it's not. But by simply start a conversation like that, it may attract some less delicate people who'll start to complain " why don't you make Y instead of X " and then it'll all go tumbling down again and again. Sorry but I don't want that. I may sound like a despot here but the RRW made it this far, I don't want to see it end because of such stupid incidents.
Now to make things clear. The short transition for elevated rail > rail will NOT be deleted from the game. I'll be part of the puzzle pieces as it has always been. HOWEVER, the recent development showing the DRAGGABLE Elevated RRW WILL NOT include such a transition simply because RRW aims at a realistic rendering of the railways in simcity and that transition is everything but realistic.
And I'm even going to go even further and add something else: to the future people who think they'll be wise to complain that RRW isn't realist.... is ugly etc but want the RRW features (Flextracks, wide curves etc) for the standard rail, well why don't you try your hands at coding and do it yourself? The NAM team does their work on their free time that I'm sure they would like to spend doing something else rather than RUL for hours. What's more they do it for free because the NAM is FREE. It takes lots of time, lots of hours everyday for weeks and months to come close to have what we have now. So please understand that before complaining about such things.
That will be all from me.
Arthur - SC4Devotion Administrator.
Oh I?m sorry, I didn't mean by my comment (it was more than a comment, not a complaint), about the matter, was totally not my intention to start a discussion or harm in any way the project. &mmm &mmm
I understand that the piece is going to stay, my bad reading, so, end of chapter ok? :)
Thanks Noah & Art. This kind of thing has come up since day one--human nature tends to resist change--but the RRW has been doing fine all along. In fact, shortly before its initial launch, I remember a fellow NAMite claimed (also publicly) no one would use it. I've noticed that right now, he uses it himself. . .
Now, I've rewritten Part 1 of the STR crosslinks code; all orthogonal adjacencies should now be in good shape. Next up are the diagonals.
Meanwhile I've taken the chance to add the DxO SAM crossings. This code should form a good basis for the ERRW SAM overpasses.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FIBgpmkn.jpg&hash=d22cc9bcfb4230a6a4b0140ea2a3972ddc0a9abc)
Also some additions to the SAM stability while I was at it.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fy2BQika.jpg&hash=69afab46a7d36829e184a03a9a5d9a5526cc51d3)
Cheers
Willy
The transition is scrapped due to grade restrictions. I'm not sure what the standards are anywhere, if this (https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-37.7138958,144.4040226,14.17z/data=!5m1!1e4?hl=en) is any indication, 256m is not enough for an elevation increase of 7.5m. In the 19th century there was this one slope in the UK that was considered downright terrifying; wheelchair ramps are steeper
Just to reiterate: The existing puzzle-based viaduct rail transition is not being "scrapped", deleted, or otherwise made inaccessible to users. Its model simply isn't getting reused for the new draggable ERRW paradigm. You'll still be able to plop the old puzzle piece if you want to (unless I've seriously misunderstood the last few posts), just like you can choose to install and plop any of the RHW's now-deprecated puzzle-based ramps or height transitions. It just won't have any of the new, draggable functionality; it'll continue to be a static puzzle piece.
Ok
woodb3kmaster is correct! The static piece is not being removed! We don't like removing already released content for backwards compatibility unless absolutely necessary!
There are very few instances that this has happened.
So enough!
Any more comments regarding this issue may result in corrective action!
-eggman121
woodb3kmaster
Thanks for clarifying! This is very true!
Excellent job Willy!As for the transition pieces....I am not a great fan of them as i think they really look unreal, but as mentioned before those puzzle pieces are not going to disappear so if anyone fancies using them he is free to do so :thumbsup:
STR fun! Yay! :bnn:
Bravo! :thumbsup: This is the kind of project which symbiotically boosts both the SAM and the STR. Some SAM-like (think dirt or gravel) railroad crossings IRL lend themselves to STR.
Thanks folks. Love your support! :thumbsup:
Not much news from me, but if you've seen my latest MD update, you've seen this one:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FOg30NrR.jpg&hash=9b71cfb6cf52474019b424f9d7959546c3c73f2d)
I'm not entirely sure how to implement it in the NAM, if at all. At this point I'm considering applying the track texture only (the see-through idea comes from Noah, cheers mate :thumbsup:), and making the rusty truss texture something separate outside of the NAM. That's assuming there'd be any interest in it.
Cheers
Willy
Is there any plan to 'invert' the R3-R2 compound DTR and/or STR turnout (now one track diagonal is getting two orto tracks, or vica - it depends on the direction. I'd like to get one orto track what is becoming two diagonal tracks in that turnout.)
Is that even possible?
Thanks!
- Tyberius
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 09, 2016, 04:29:10 PM
...That's assuming there'd be any interest in it.
Umm.... YES PLEASE! ;D
That beautiful bridge definitely deserves to see the light of day (yes I recognize a bit of hypocrisy in me saying that :D )
Was fun to go through the tuning process with you--couldn't have hoped for a better outcome &apls
Yes please.
One thing: Turn the diagonals. Specially at the end, the diagonal should go down and outwards, so the forces can be transferred to the supports.
Beautiful bridge!I would like it as it is :thumbsup:
I concord with vester!! :thumbsup:
I can't wait for the release! &hlp
&apls Very good. Now I wait forward this with catenaries
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 07, 2016, 12:54:03 PM
Now, I've rewritten Part 1 of the STR crosslinks code; all orthogonal adjacencies should now be in good shape. Next up are the diagonals.
Meanwhile I've taken the chance to add the DxO SAM crossings. This code should form a good basis for the ERRW SAM overpasses.
Also some additions to the SAM stability while I was at it.
This looks great - I came by to check into the possibility of a fix for these frequently used crossings. Thank you!
can't see why NAM team would not be interested in that bridge texture :thumbsup:
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 09, 2016, 04:29:10 PM
I'm not entirely sure how to implement it in the NAM, if at all.
As far as bridges go in the game, they're a bit of an odd duck when it comes to traffic modding like the NAM. The method of bridge laying is really it's own separate area and is hard-coded into the game if you want it to come up on the "bridge menu" as an option to drag. Effectively it would need to be made of overlapping pieces that the bridge rul file woud organize based on the given length of a bridge. At minimum you would just need a start/end piece (the game auto-rotates it), a piece for the pillar, and a repeat piece which would fill in everywhere else. Things like the suspension bridges effectively have a custom build for each possible length of a span built in to the rul file. Fairly simple once you know what you're looking at, but a royal pain in the butt to go through. The support truss could also, possibly, be used as a t21 exemplar for a quick and dirty approach.
Lastly, if you want to skip the whole bridge implementation, you could take it the way of old-school bridge supports and make the actual support truss a height-specific ploppable that could be repeated across the length of the bridge.
It's been years since I tinkered with any bridge design, but there are several discussions of it still on the boards here if you'd like any further info on it.
I like the model.
-Matt
Reworked the model so the diagonals goes the right way:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fvy1f1G0.jpg&hash=fed55a0b2bb081d34d41a69f0be2ae2454f23885)
Now I just need to get the models back into the dat-file.
So who did the original model of the bridge ?
Quote from: vester on February 12, 2016, 02:21:21 PM
So who did the original model of the bridge ?
Nice improvement, honestly, I wouldn't have noticed that detail ::).
Looks like one of the original DBE bridges to me, just with reworked tracks?
Quote from: mgb204 on February 12, 2016, 02:37:14 PM
Looks like one of the original DBE bridges to me, just with reworked tracks?
DBE Bridge ? Sorry ? ()what()
Sorry, diagonal bridge enabler :)
Such pieces existed before now for making bridges like the modular puzzle piece viaducts.
Ok, I'm going to sound like a noobie noobie noob, (I haven't really played around with NAM 34 yet) but is this type of overpass available at the L1 (7.5m) height yet (ortho or diagonal)?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgpKpfTZ.jpg&hash=af742eafd793bad013e78a6e5e275ac4f2a428eb)
For example, can we dig a road down 7.5m and create an rail overpass? I want to make my own can opener bridge (http://11foot8.com/)! ;)
OOPS! I'd love for that to happen to our automata. ;D
So, just for you noobie Matt. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmgEloWg.jpg&hash=219ced6c8da08f24122b87615d9a70f849ad4432)
Yeah, L1 viaducts of course. What did you think? Not in the current NAM of course; probably not even in the following NAM. But definitely in the dev stage. . . I need to add hundreds (100s) of models, exemplars, paths for it to be in the game. Only for then to add the overrides of course, which counts up to a good many hour of work. But eventually, you'll get them. We might even add a ramp Waaaah, good jokes willy!! :laugh:
The issue I'm still contemplating is how to get the L1 models. I can easily use the L2 models and squash them in half--after which it only requires a texture stretched in height, if that makes sense to you. It's not ideal, but it's acceptable for the time being.
In the interest of trying to communicate more clearly ($%Grinno$%), draggable viaducts are still in the development stage and may not appear in the next NAM.
Cheers
Willy
:bnn:
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 12, 2016, 10:15:45 PM
The issue I'm still contemplating is how to get the L1 models. I can easily use the L2 models and squash them in half--after which it only requires a texture stretched in height, if that makes sense to you. It's not ideal, but it's acceptable for the time being.
Oh yeah, I think those (reusing L2 models) would work just fine! No sense in reinventing the wheel, unless you are just itching for more work ;D
Thanks for making my night!
Great stuff!
QuoteYeah, L1 viaducts of course. What did you think? Not in the current NAM of course; probably not even in the following NAM. But definitely in the dev stage. . . I need to add hundreds (100s) of models, exemplars, paths for it to be in the game. Only for then to add the overrides of course, which counts up to a good many hour of work. But eventually, you'll get them. We might even add a ramp Waaaah, good jokes willy!! :laugh:
Yeah!! &apls :bnn: :bnn: I really like that! I use only L1 level for road overpasses. ;D
Call it a can opener-bridge if you want but the clearance of those viaducts is still 6.5 meters or over 20 feet--plenty of room for the average overpass. As far off as they are, good to see more of them Willy. Can't wait for that ramp!
Quote from: Indiana Joe on February 15, 2016, 12:47:16 PM
Call it a can opener-bridge if you want but the clearance of those viaducts is still 6.5 meters or over 20 feet--plenty of room for the average overpass. As far off as they are, good to see more of them Willy. Can't wait for that ramp!
True, but those 3m tall sims probably dive extra tall trucks :P
Quote from: Simcoug on February 15, 2016, 03:22:07 PM
Quote from: Indiana Joe on February 15, 2016, 12:47:16 PM
Call it a can opener-bridge if you want but the clearance of those viaducts is still 6.5 meters or over 20 feet--plenty of room for the average overpass. As far off as they are, good to see more of them Willy. Can't wait for that ramp!
True, but those 3m tall sims probably dive extra tall trucks :P
laugh hard on that can opener brigde reference :D well, i don't know why would they
dive a truck in the first place, but I guess you are right :P
Willy, as usual, great updates. I think I use more rails now, thanks to your work, so :thumbsup:
Thanks folks. I'm currently allowing my two favorite networks to interact. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuBVWZWU.jpg&hash=808c94bc2d24a0cb93d46ebccd8ba2455c3e5140)
I expect that there will still be silent (or not so silent) skeptics watching the continued draggablization of static puzzle pieces. Well, try building this overpass using PPs only:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYFUl66B.jpg&hash=414ee712737970372ce2008513f85381f2245efd)
Not so easy, huh?!
Well, this has just become very easy.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l4Ki7IluuLLVyqbyE/giphy.gif)
RealStability™:
(https://media.giphy.com/media/26FPvZqj3XIuGKkEg/giphy.gif)
That's right folks, you don't even need to click around to get these in place. And at 1,800 lines as we speak, this isn't even very code-intensive.
Cheers
Willy
:o
wow!! &apls &apls
thats awesome!!
Wow
Great work, Willy. &apls
I loved the double-width pillars that appear between the tracks. Definitely this redefines what 'stability' means!!
Are you serious? That is amazing! &apls
Wow! Awesome work &apls
Ultra long RRW overpasses over the RHW! Great stuff!
OMG!!! :o :o
But you have ruined the fun 'random clicking' game that has become SC4 ()sad()
:P
Absolutely amazing!
Fantastic development Willy &apls &apls
Thanks everyone! :thumbsup:
Added the 10S and the C variants, and support for parallel lines:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeArbmui.jpg&hash=ae7924ec68e1cf334dad11bb2a331a0be79e7ecc)
Pour le GLR, la meme chose:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FddGiCEs.jpg&hash=674dc7861ec6095693225e9f2d7361b8c1e4317c)
And as a bonus, the missing FA3 crossing:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYI7DtcV.jpg&hash=129abaa10cc8d6944f2e028edf821cad253ccb9e)
Cheers
Willy
Fabulous! &apls &apls &apls
...and he keeps going..... &apls
Not sure about the textures on the pillars and the arches.
Ron's "iron clad concrete" version, Arne. Not my personal favorite, but I loaded it to check whether the UV values were correct.
Cheers
Willy
My good god that is looking excellent! Now, this question has nothing to do with that, but I was wondering.. based on the parallel rail lines, will we ever see a 4 track without the spacing in between? kind of a rail avenue I would say.. will we?
Holy Shizam Batman, say it aint so. It really blows me and Robin away. ;D &apls &apls &apls :bnn:
Amazing!! &apls &apls
And the FAR crossing is icing on the cake :thumbsup:
Wonderfull!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
[horn blows] all tracks ahead!!...
well done... all looks promising good... :thumbsup:
back to switch box
:popcorn:
Thanks all! Jack Wilds, good to see you still around. :thumbsup:
Seems like the NWM has got it coming tonight! Rail overpasses across NWM networks are a frequently requested feature, one we can finally scrap from the list.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZIkRPH7.jpg&hash=62566c1d3debc2b5adafa8ce520e2fee1f5ac3dd)
Here's another at grade crossing. Not quite the same as the last one! $%Grinno$%
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUSs82T5.jpg&hash=12a17f57ee14862b1a4068f465a125c4d5c350be)
Sidewalks. . . The OWR and Avenue overpasses will have the sidewalk appear at all times. It's either that, or none at all. Easy to bring out a fix for that if you prefer it the other way, though.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FXd3Ah79.jpg&hash=ed84fd124f4acf4916663730a6e1af0e8e9ff52d)
Quote from: cmdp123789 on February 18, 2016, 11:33:09 AMMy good god that is looking excellent! Now, this question has nothing to do with that, but I was wondering.. based on the parallel rail lines, will we ever see a 4 track without the spacing in between? kind of a rail avenue I would say.. will we?
TTR and QTR are in the pipeline (as per the FAQ on the first page, which I just brought up to date). The NAM pipeline is quite long, though :D
Cheers
Willy
Willy this is seriously getting incredible!Who would have thought we could get so far???
Thanks!
OMG!!!!
Finally it will be possible to build Rail overpasses above NWM! Just what I need in my city! :)
Thanks very much!!! :)
- Tyberius
Looks amazaing Willy :thumbsup:,
You have been so productive since your come back ;)
amazing! :o
Thanks folks.
Quote from: Gugu3 on February 19, 2016, 01:13:51 AMWilly this is seriously getting incredible!Who would have thought we could get so far???
Thanks!
Far? We're nowhere! There's work for the next ten years :D
Right now, we are here though:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSxrcSZs.jpg&hash=e84f98425294e865690a4f2a53660b939807d0c6)
Still mulling a prettier solution for the TLA-7.
Cheers
Willy
Was there a Roman god of aqueducts? If so I think you're channeling his spirit in the age of railroads ;D
It would decrease the clearance between the roadway and and the bridge a bit, but instead of a support maybe a deck truss solution.
Just an idea for TLA7. The distances may not be too far to truly need the support, but with the truss setup, that would be guaranteed. :)
I wouldn't have expected myself to consider a wide road (even under a railway viaduct) to be beautiful, but well, here we are... :P
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 19, 2016, 08:00:44 PM
Still mulling a prettier solution for the TLA-7.
Maybe an idea would be to require a transition to AVE-6, so that no one risks crashing into the middle pillar?
Maybe a traffic island as in the RHW-6/8C Overpass? ()what()
Jondor used some props for this for TLA 7 crossings that blocked the middle turn lane, you could re-purpose them perhaps?
A special bridge would be cool though, although I appreciate making one from scratch is a lot of effort. Still, you could repurpose one of ML's El-Rail models and change the tracks. Two nice bridge models already exist for 3-tile crossings:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi991.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faf39%2FMGB204%2FElBridgeModels_zpsq1cxyfnd.jpg%7Eoriginal&hash=c235c455292fc8db4dfcf313598c92172edab6bb)
Perhaps worth considering?
Sweeeet!
Yeah, either use a truss bridge (probably a through-truss bridge would be best) for the TLA-7 crossing or put an island in the middle such that the turn lane temporarily ends.
Thanks folks, all good ideas. I'm inclined to go with Robin's.
Someone wanted an aqueduct? ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrE7UsDb.jpg&hash=b642c85dc049c5be3186dc7f08990ba8757ded42)
Cheers
Willy
A steel flowing aqueduct? XD :thumbsup:
Beautiful work on the viaduct &apls Is that a conventional bridge or one made with DBE?
DBE! Some weird guy requested it, a while ago ;D
I'm approaching the end of OxO overpasses. . . Good thing, since I'm also approaching the end of my IID range :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FwtddJQh.jpg&hash=8e2584e629dd3865f8929f686a74271dcf967386)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUJY8WcR.jpg&hash=11ee525a6ff97a8a650a40dba80a27bde3951d83)
There's a few funky ones remaining. . .
Cheers
Willy
This is great Willy!
fantastic! Your fingers must be melting the keyboard typing all that code :D
Will you be able to 'recycle' some of this work to create the L1 overpasses, or does that require starting again from scratch?
(says the completely clueless dude when it comes to transit modding) %confuso
This keeps getting better by the day, hour, minute...... &apls
Nice crossings &apls Thanks a ton for that viaduct work, besides the specific area in my city sorely needing it now it will make possible some amazing, sloped viaducts crossing the countryside but not following the terrain elevation below them. Building those kinds of rails with winding curves at ground level and tunnels regularly was 90% of why I picked the region I'm using now :D
Thanks all. Here's some more supported setups:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FqCNJ4wj.jpg&hash=1724d46578d4577fd27607ed9f581c671d1d7268)
Quote from: Simcoug on February 22, 2016, 05:21:11 AMfantastic! Your fingers must be melting the keyboard typing all that code :D
Will you be able to 'recycle' some of this work to create the L1 overpasses, or does that require starting again from scratch?
(says the completely clueless dude when it comes to transit modding) %confuso
Actually, 70% of the work involved is the S3D editing (which means melting the mouse). Coding is relatively easy and involves mostly copy-paste & replace actions (there's a logical IID scheme behind it).
The way the override code works is pretty straightforward (even I understand it :D). It roughly works like "Tile A + Tile B becomes Tile A + Tile C".
For instance, this is the basic SAM2 part:
0x5d740000,1,0,0x5e54b200,0,0=0x5d740000,1,0,0x5d773a00,1,0
0x5d740000,1,0,0x5e511200,0,0=0x5d740000,1,0,0x5d773a00,1,0
0x5d773a00,1,0,0x5d540000,1,0=0x5d773a00,1,0,0x5d740000,1,0
0x5d773a00,1,0,0x5d540200,1,0=0x5d773a00,1,0,0x5d740000,1,0
0x5d773a00,1,0,0x5d540200,3,0=0x5d773a00,1,0,0x5d740000,3,0Visualized with memo's RulViewer:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0YuhZdM.jpg&hash=d02c3cd76918e4ce7acae5d0a86f76a47e25c92d)
The other rotations need to be covered as well, so the eventual code here is 16 lines instead of 5. Then there's the other adjacencies, but I'm not going crazy with those. All in all, the OxO overpass code is around 2,000 lines. That excludes the code required to make networks like the SAM continue as SAM next to the overpass, but that's an even easier part.
For the L1 network, the percentage will shift to 99% model editing, since most of the coding would involve replacing "0x5d7" with "0x5d6". All the "0x5d6" models still need to be made, though. The course of action I'm contemplating will be to release all the OxO overpasses first for both L2 and L1. Overpasses involving diagonals will probably follow in a later release.
Cheers
Willy
:bnn:
Can't wait ;D
Hot! :D :thumbsup:
You too you want to smooth sc4 world ;D
All this work is amazing Willy :thumbsup:
WOW, absolutely WOW ;D If this is possible that could it be possible to make a neighbor connection like with Maxis Elevated Rails. I know there is work around, but to me it is just not the same as a traditional connection. Finally, what about a connection piece from Rail Viaduct to Maxis Elevated Rail?
Absolutely amazing!
Thank you folks :thumbsup:
Did I mention funky overpasses?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F6frIUkA.jpg&hash=49f549632f18a5b0e254fde5dcead9f837353230)
Thanks once again to Arne for helping on the modeling side.
Cheers
Willy
This is really cool. Hope it'll be compatible with the different overpass mods. :)
this is just getting ludicrously awesome... thank you so much for persevering with this and also for sharing your progress and showing these awesome images.
&apls
This is great work! &apls
Sorry dyoungyn, forgot to reply to you (not the first time I think :D)
Quote from: dyoungyn on February 22, 2016, 02:28:30 PMWOW, absolutely WOW ;D If this is possible that could it be possible to make a neighbor connection like with Maxis Elevated Rails. I know there is work around, but to me it is just not the same as a traditional connection. Finally, what about a connection piece from Rail Viaduct to Maxis Elevated Rail?
Neighbor connections work fine with ERRW as is. No need for any workaround pieces or tricks.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEhjYtxw.jpg&hash=ca86701a635bf5d4d9642c5c383b4c5b963ccbbc)
Quote from: art128 on February 23, 2016, 09:36:06 AMThis is really cool. Hope it'll be compatible with the different overpass mods. :)
Which overpass mods exactly? If you mean the alternative viaduct textures, they're compatible (as I've shown so far). If you mean anything else, I'm afraid. . .
michae95l, welcome to the forum!
Cheers
Willy
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 23, 2016, 11:16:38 AM
If you mean anything else, I'm afraid. . .
I meant this one: http://hide-inoki.com/bbs/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=818 I don't know how the mechanics of everything works, if it'll be automatic or anything so I asked. :)
Quote from: art128 on February 23, 2016, 09:36:06 AM
This is really cool. Hope it'll be compatible with the different overpass mods. :)
Probably not, due to the way they work, new S3D models would have to be made. Some details are T21'd, those would work if re-ID'd/rotated to match the new piece IDs.
I am toying with updating the Draggable Overpasses with the Jap NAM Facelift models. It's little more than an ID/rotation change. While the Puzzle pieces still exist, I quite like having two styles to select between so I'm not sure about this.
Willy,
While I and probably like other fans so appreciate all the hard work you and the NAM Team are doing which we you all are so gracious to provide and do. Not to be nit picky or selfish, the neighbor connection with Rail Viaduct and Elevated Rail appear to work differently. Attached without the paths as I cannot get them to work, show the arrow is in different positions.
Finally, Attached is also a wish item for a connector piece to go from Maxis Elevated Rail to Rail Viaduct.
dyoungyn
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 23, 2016, 11:16:38 AM
Sorry dyoungyn, forgot to reply to you (not the first time I think :D)
Quote from: dyoungyn on February 22, 2016, 02:28:30 PMWOW, absolutely WOW ;D If this is possible that could it be possible to make a neighbor connection like with Maxis Elevated Rails. I know there is work around, but to me it is just not the same as a traditional connection. Finally, what about a connection piece from Rail Viaduct to Maxis Elevated Rail?
Neighbor connections work fine with ERRW as is. No need for any workaround pieces or tricks.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEhjYtxw.jpg&hash=ca86701a635bf5d4d9642c5c383b4c5b963ccbbc)
Quote from: art128 on February 23, 2016, 09:36:06 AMThis is really cool. Hope it'll be compatible with the different overpass mods. :)
Which overpass mods exactly? If you mean the alternative viaduct textures, they're compatible (as I've shown so far). If you mean anything else, I'm afraid. . .
michae95l, welcome to the forum!
Cheers
Willy
dyoungyn,
Viaduct Rail is part of the heavy rail system; it can handle freight as well as passenger trains.
Elevated Rail is part of the light rail system (along with GLR and Subway); it handles light rail passenger trains, but not freight.
As such, connecting the two systems is generally a bad idea (particularly as you can wind up with such things as the wrong automata on the wrong system).
- Jess
dyoungyn, it may be worth noting that the placement of the arrow has nothing to do with whether or not the paths work. GLR also has this problem: the arrow for the NC is 15m above the tracks, but this is because the El rail NC arrows are designed for that network, and thus rest 15m in the air.
Similarly, all RHW arrows always point outwards, because the game sees the RHW as a bunch of adjacent Dirt roads, whose NCs would behave similar to RD-2, thus the arrows always face out (as opposed to MHW or the default Avenue network, with one arrow out and another in).
Does traffic not use the workaround connection, even if you force it?
Thank you all for the replies. I use more the Viaduct Rail for light rail as with the Maxis Elevated Rail to transport commuters. If the arrows react the same way no matter the location of the arrow, then I guess it is appropriate.
Another reason I like the Maxis Elevated Rail as it is more stable when plopping Stations. I do not however, like the high transitions, curves and such as I love the Viaduct Rail and what it provides.
Finally, it is much easier to drag Elevated Rail across a river. One must truly decide the pros and cons to both I guess. The only reason I have been wanting that transition from both is because of the feasibility of both networks.
dyoungyn
Keep in mind that a lot of the currently cited reasons for ease of use of El-Rail are in part because there aren't Draggable Rail Viaducts yet. The NAM Team considers them to be two separate traffic types, and I don't expect that transition to be made.
-Alex
&apls ??? :o &apls
Indeed, what Alex said. I've seen trams trying to compete with freight trains. They never win. $%Grinno$%
Been keeping myself busy tonight with some more crossing stuff. Textures are placeholders--I need to touch them up a little more.
If I'm correct, later this year it'll be the NWM's 10th birthday :bnn:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FaStG1aH.jpg&hash=2bbe0d19d3cb1dedcd29fdcbb966e44656b7402f)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Ft2rbNY7.jpg&hash=4c4c6bc95a1a6b04b2e34d0bcbd7d664331bbb2a)
Don't get me started on how to do stop lines and crossing props on these. . .
What's more, I've generated a new 128,000 line STR code base. You can expect a serious upgrade to the network's crosslinking possibilities. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9DlakzS.jpg&hash=7d88a35f1e6976a5a13be2417fa6b6d958dab7e1)
(Not fully stable yet, apparently. Think I can sneak in some more lines :D)
Cheers
Willy
WOW!!!!! This game just keeps getting better and better. PLEASE keep the game alive and well for years to come. Great job and can't wait for some more.
Looking nice!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-0xKCgtYBn50%2FU5XnqxkLn2I%2FAAAAAAAAIN0%2FwYwzLy4oZrw%2Fs1600%2Fdrooling-smiley.png&hash=902ebfe201137f2e7a3e73e4b9f84a642367c83e) | I can't waiiiiiiiiit!! |
How to make switch like that ?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnsa38.casimages.com%2Fimg%2F2016%2F02%2F27%2F160227023704328037.png&hash=c4029d4b8826f3e6d3a91d8afe245e6eb88abe51) (http://www.casimages.com/i/160227023704328037.png.html)
Thanks in advance
Quote from: yann on February 27, 2016, 05:27:50 AM
How to make switch like that ?
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnsa38.casimages.com%2Fimg%2F2016%2F02%2F27%2F160227023704328037.png&hash=c4029d4b8826f3e6d3a91d8afe245e6eb88abe51) (http://www.casimages.com/i/160227023704328037.png.html)
Thanks in advance
@yann I think it's a feature of the next NAM (34). Watch this Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXinZJTQle4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXinZJTQle4)
----
I have a question too. Is it possible to remove or change the sand/dirt texture under rails if they're next to developements? thank you!
Quote from: schokoladeneis 1 on February 27, 2016, 09:14:07 AM
@yann I think it's a feature of the next NAM (34). Watch this Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXinZJTQle4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXinZJTQle4)
NAM 34 is already out, and has been since December. The FlexTrack functionality, while originally planned for NAM 34, was actually added in NAM 33, as it was finished while there were delays with other components that needed to be addressed.
The one piece of our documentation that actually is updated is the RRW FlexTrack guide, which shows how to build that those switches.
Quote from: schokoladeneis 1 on February 27, 2016, 09:14:07 AM
I have a question too. Is it possible to remove or change the sand/dirt texture under rails if they're next to developements? thank you!
As I recall, the dirt on Rails is the same dirt you see on Road networks in Agriculture zones, so if you changed it, it'd affect both. Removing it altogether wouldn't be possible without changing the entire network into a model-based setup.
-Alex
Quote from: Tarkus on February 27, 2016, 02:14:55 PMQuote from: schokoladeneis 1 on February 27, 2016, 09:14:07 AM
I have a question too. Is it possible to remove or change the sand/dirt texture under rails if they're next to developements? thank you!
As I recall, the dirt on Rails is the same dirt you see on Road networks in Agriculture zones, so if you changed it, it'd affect both. Removing it altogether wouldn't be possible without changing the entire network into a model-based setup.
-Alex
I was under the impression that RRW is already model-based.
At any rate, The RUM for RRW (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/29279-rum-for-rrw/) is probably what you need; I use it and there is an option for no dirt under rails next to developments/zoning.
The bulk of RRW is model based, but a number of parts like crossings are not.
Indeed RUM for RRW has a transparent base to fix this. The farming/rail dirt is basically the 4th sidewalk type after $, $$ and $$$. As such it's possible to replace the sidewalk texture with a transparent one, but it will indeed do the same for zoning next to farms.
Quote from: Tarkus on February 27, 2016, 02:14:55 PM
Quote from: schokoladeneis 1 on February 27, 2016, 09:14:07 AM
@yann I think it's a feature of the next NAM (34). Watch this Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXinZJTQle4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXinZJTQle4)
NAM 34 is already out, and has been since December. The FlexTrack functionality, while originally planned for NAM 34, was actually added in NAM 33, as it was finished while there were delays with other components that needed to be addressed.
The one piece of our documentation that actually is updated is the RRW FlexTrack guide, which shows how to build that those switches.
Quote from: schokoladeneis 1 on February 27, 2016, 09:14:07 AM
I have a question too. Is it possible to remove or change the sand/dirt texture under rails if they're next to developements? thank you!
As I recall, the dirt on Rails is the same dirt you see on Road networks in Agriculture zones, so if you changed it, it'd affect both. Removing it altogether wouldn't be possible without changing the entire network into a model-based setup.
-Alex
Hello, thanks you for the link !
This is awesome for update railway system of all city of Rosewood region !
Thanks a lot !
Yann
Great stuff Willy!
Quick question about this image;
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEhjYtxw.jpg&hash=ca86701a635bf5d4d9642c5c383b4c5b963ccbbc)
What's the trick to get the arrow for the neighbourhood connection by itself to appear for railways? There are ways to get it for streets, avenues & highway(thanks to this thread; http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=7350.0) but none of those same steps seem to work or are compatible for railroads.
Hi TMT,
There is no trick.
Rail will automatically make neighbor connections by dragging to the edge of the tile, and accepting the prompt for a new neighbor connection.
The arrow is there because it's placed by the game, and the game views Heavy Rail as a non-elevated network. (GLR, on the other hand, has a 15.5m elevated arrow, because the base network of EL-Rail is raised that high, and as far as the game is concerned, GLR and El-Rail are identical).
The picture in question shows draggable Elevated Heavy Rail, which is currently under development and not available to the public.
You can achieve the same effect by dragging Ground Heavy Rail (the default network drawn with the Rail Tool) and making the neighbor connection where you need it, and then simply plopping the current Elevated Heavy Rail Puzzle Pieces over the track, up to the city border. The neighbor connection will continue to function, and now visually your E-Rail continues into the neighboring city.
Sorry for the long radio silence. I have been quite busy.
I have been able to get these textures made and coded however...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FzZFGKZ1.jpg&hash=564fc3f77d4fff236e6f931c0c21b8b7fad8cb3e)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FxHhYQzq.jpg&hash=f0d709e48c89c30d2326ff3326a3faec2b149674)
They will eventuate to the next NAM (NAM 35 but until RL stops bothering us it will be a tight ride)
-eggman121
!
:popcorn:
Nice.... Really nice... :)
Incredibly nice!
smooth, smooth, smooth :P
Just some of the crossings I could have used the other day !
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2Fsmilies%2Fdancer.gif&hash=86e18b94f2574310832f6880278bdfa213422baf) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2Fsmilies%2Fdancer.gif&hash=86e18b94f2574310832f6880278bdfa213422baf) (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi40.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe242%2Fvester_DK%2Fsmilies%2Fdancer.gif&hash=86e18b94f2574310832f6880278bdfa213422baf)
Keep them coming.
It's getting better all the time...
Smooth operator &apls
Smooth as Butter or a babies but.
Brilliant stuff! The railway meistro returns!
Ooh, fancy! Glad to see you back!
Looks brilliant! &apls
Thank you for all the kind comments everyone :thumbsup:
I have some new pieces that I have made. Will I show them? Wye not :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FdnWT5EB.jpg&hash=9893b77f5f133647f8c4ccd0fb9c94101ad1385a)
Thanks again for all the positive comments!
-eggman121
QuoteWye not :D
;D More beautiful work :bnn:
"Wye" :D
The switches shown in both posts look great! :thumbsup:
I'm curious, seeing as we already have a Y that splits into two diagonal rails and you just made a Y that splits into two orthogonal rails, is it possible to make a Y that splits into two FAR3 rails?
eggman121,
WOW, 14 years after SC4's initial release and the modding continues, ... amazing work friend, amazing work. Please keep it going. (WOW, so ... much ... has changed. SC4 on Steam?)
Side Note: I've been fooling around with "Train Fever" lately, fully modded of course. Waiting on Transport Fever to come out before I begin modding again. On Steam, I am BuffHamster, ... All Buff, No Fluff.
Thanks for the comments NCD :thumbsup: $%Grinno$%
I have also overhauled your original Texture pack that you may be interested in here "$Deal"$ :
http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=16787.msg507635#msg507635
I hope that you can stick around or at least see what I have been up too. I am still working on the RRW and that will continue going for some time!
SC4 is on steam and other digital providers so if you are missing a copy you can get one.
Also check out Simmer2 He is doing some amazing work in the rail space ;D
Can't wait to get the new rail out too all you people!
-eggman121
It is truly great work friend. :thumbsup: Did the rail gauge change?
Simmer2's stuff is exactly what I was aiming for way back then. Ah, good times. ;D
My copies of SC4 stuff is in "offline storage" atm. It seems there is over 5gb of stuff there.
http://www.train-fever.com/ (http://www.train-fever.com/) has spoiled me with their "drag and drop" roads and rails, too bad much of it is in German though, ... %confuso
Quote from: north country dude on June 17, 2016, 02:12:41 PM
Did the rail gauge change?
Yes it did and the spacing changed as well for DTR to better suit RL railways. The Rail network has been written up all the way from the ground up. You can thank
Swordmaster for the new specification.
Exciting times for SC4 indeed.
What did you think of the RRW update of the texture pack I compiled?
-eggman121
It is truly great work. You have done well with the new textures and mastered the SC4 transit coding, it seems. I feel honored. :crytissue:
So, who is going to rebuild the modular yard? That one uses some of the older texture packs too. I give you permission to update it if you want, if you delegate it to someone else, that is fine too. :thumbsup:
Quote from: north country dude on June 17, 2016, 03:32:31 PM
It is truly great work. You have done well with the new textures and mastered the SC4 transit coding, it seems. I feel honored. :crytissue:
So, who is going to rebuild the modular yard? That one uses some of the older texture packs too. I give you permission to update it if you want, if you delegate it to someone else, that is fine too. :thumbsup:
Aww thanks :) . As for the modular yard that is planned. Just have too find the time to make the textures.
-eggman121
Quote from: north country dude on June 17, 2016, 02:12:41 PM
It is truly great work friend. :thumbsup: Did the rail gauge change?
Simmer2's stuff is exactly what I was aiming for way back then. Ah, good times. ;D
My copies of SC4 stuff is in "offline storage" atm. It seems there is over 5gb of stuff there.
http://www.train-fever.com/ (http://www.train-fever.com/) has spoiled me with their "drag and drop" roads and rails, too bad much of it is in German though, ... %confuso
Hello NCD. I'm glad you like my rail related works. Many more are on the way :)
Awesome work Simmer2, awesome work. "Keep building, and they will come." :thumbsup:
Good to see you around NCD. Don't be a stranger.
Awesome to hear from you, NCD! You should consider giving SC4 another try after the revolutions that have happened after you left ;) And I'll agree with Arne, don't be a stranger :)
First, JBSimio comes back and now NCD returns! Welcome back! Nice to meet you! :P
Hello everyone!
Been working on the Rails again...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F5wg8bRk.jpg&hash=9611b0956d0fad299b7f4953edc37b01ca98dd60)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fs0dqNFC.jpg&hash=91d1cc03b324b34da4c32ea02a0776579e20150e)
Just some easy gap filling for the RRW.
There is much more planned so stay tuned for more ;)
-eggman121
Ooh, nice!!
Impressive to say the least! &apls
WoW
Impressive !
It's amazing!! &apls &apls &apls
Are the switches functional in UDI Mode?
Fantastic &apls &apls
OMG!This is crazy ::) ::) :D :D :D
That's impressive and would certainly become a very essential piece of railways!
Well, I knew this moment would happen anytime: I cannot even imagine a way to use that crazy wonderful crossing, this mod has simply become too sophisticated to fully comprehend it, and that's great!
Aww, Thanks for all the awesome comments $%Grinno$%
So, I have a new teaser for you...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F1GCpD4e.jpg&hash=c71561de1f0dc4dec78ab7a2885372a40f996ded)
Coding was hard but the paths where a copy/paste mission from other tiles.
-eggman121
Stupendous! Glad to FINALLY see single track cross transitions. Great work and so looking forward to seeing more.
Looks great!
That is incredible! &apls &apls &apls
Fantastic work!! &apls &apls
Looks really cool :thumbsup:
What about the catenaries ()lurker()
Again! :popcorn:
Stephen does it again and again.... &apls
@GirafeQuote from: Girafe on June 28, 2016, 06:04:12 AM
What about the catenaries ()lurker()
.....hahahahahaha!!
Thanks for all the comments people :)
Now to answer a ominous question...
Quote from: Girafe on June 28, 2016, 06:04:12 AM
What about the catenaries ()lurker()
What delved me into making the FlexTrack and hence Rail Modding was the fact that the catearies where having to fit puzzle pieces that where aligned in all sorts of different angles. I had to reduce the complexity a couple of times to make things work but when I really got onto the FlexTrack side of things the amount of content that I could make soon over passed my ability to do both. A decision was than made to continue with FlexTrack that had a more wider appeal than the catenaries in my view. Being only one person behind these missions with my RL situation such as work and frequent travel soon turned me to focus on specific projects only.
FlexTrack slides in nicely with the work
Willy (SwordMaster) has already done and has a wider appeal. Catenaries where thwart with danger as the logistics and localization of the poles would be overbearing. So to represent the wider community I decided to make FlexTrack my top priority.
So where from here. I have the standards and a Gmax Script (Alas Basic) that can generate any angled wire with Cartesian coordinates even if they are measured off skew for a 16mx16m tile. To map out a set of wires all you need is a vector program with the ability to measure relative distances between the start and end (X1,Y1 X2,Y2) and run the script. That is if any one wants to take on this task.But what complicates things are the fact that a SAM setup will be entailed since people will want the best of both worlds. This gets messy from a coding point of view. and duplicate IIDs would be necessitated. Something I don't envisage happening.
So where too from here. Well there is one project I am especially saving the wires for and this project will be big in its scope and size. I will continue on it until I unveil it in the not too distant future or once it reaches maturity. Fun times ahead.
Hope that answers the query ;)
-eggman121
If there is a way for your catenaries to use already produced catenary poles (I remember Uki's was in your considerations?) then no SAM setup is necessary; just utilize the T21 switching method where T21s don't update until the RULs near the network are refreshed.
Especially since a SAM setup for RRW will never happen. If it bothers you that much, release it separate from the NAM to release you of the obligation for total integration (like Alex's Arthur Berkhardt expressway project). Then you can leave it as is and only feel obligated to do the most basic of functionality updates, if things like additional FLEXtrack is added in the future. It wouldn't be the end of the world then, and, again, no obligation on your part to acquiesce to every demand of the passing downloader.
Regardless, I understand the time constraints for you projects; Flex track is definitely more useful. I just wanted to let you know to not give up hope on the other project (catenaries) (when your non-existent extra spare time surfaces) just because people are unreasonable.
These developments are a phenomenal realism and accuracy! :thumbsup:
I'm eager to see more! :)
I love the flextrack and RRW. Ever scince I saw the D1 splitter piece, I wanted to create something like this: https://www.google.de/maps/@52.5949571,11.9393997,1759m/data=!3m1!1e3 (https://www.google.de/maps/@52.5949571,11.9393997,1759m/data=!3m1!1e3).
Is there a way to do that with RRW? I am trying it right now, scratching my had how to account for the directional single tracks.
Once there was the tiny prefab triangle rail interchange. I'm basically trying to do something like that with RRW. Any ideas?
@eggman121: are there ideas for directional single track switches to go along with the existing D1 splitter?
Quote from: Seaman on July 24, 2016, 12:33:49 PM
I love the flextrack and RRW. Ever since I saw the D1 splitter piece, I wanted to create something like this:
Is there a way to do that with RRW? I am trying it right now, scratching my had how to account for the directional single tracks.
Once there was the tiny prefab triangle rail interchange. I'm basically trying to do something like that with RRW. Any ideas?
@eggman121: are there ideas for directional single track switches to go along with the existing D1 splitter?
Well there
won't be any prefab setups for that piece but with the flextrack I should be able to account for that functionality ;) I have half a free day today and it should not be too hard too make that work. I will experiment today.
-eggman121
Double posting here ::)
@Seaman
I have taken a look and it is possible with the NAM under development if you have the RRW passing under since there is no STR support at this stage for the Elevated RRW.
Overview
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FIzlKaP6.jpg&hash=d117647d40a473889b647adbdf49c0787cc26892)
Closeup
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNOXNEzi.jpg&hash=15fa40c1eea8d4a6e05e04fb219e5c36790d768d)
But I guess you want that functionality now. Well it is present in the current NAM (NAM 34) If you are willing to sacrifice the STR crossing with DTR when it passes over/under the mainline.
Crossing
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F4xHztCZ.jpg&hash=7873b8e94432b3cd3a1f2a85fcb812828a5ccf0b)
Turnouts
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FxPbuiZM.jpg&hash=2cf9ba91a48578554b2104ff663e25abf9f06507)
Overview
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FkBRbwWa.jpg&hash=785a56d271fcffe7ccdcfae3ec0ee062ff3f1c26)
So yeah, the turnout you desire is possible with the current NAM. Completely escaped me that NAM 34 was capable if you are able to work in the current bounds ;D
I have used a Diagonal x Diagonal crossing due to the fact that Orthogonal x Diagonal crossings cause path jumping.
-eggman121
That is great eggman!never really explored that kind of setup that much...giving me some inspiration!Would be even better when ESTR will be available...or L1 ERHW maybe :P :P :P
thank you so much!! you have two wonderful ideas here. The DT ST switch to get the crossing track and most of all the setup on the right side to ensure directional seperation in the switches are brilliant! I wasn't sure, which crossing caused the path jump, so thx for that info, too.
I do not dare to ask, but is/will there be a switch setup to simplify the switch setup on the right side (the directional switch or turnout)? I think there should be an old puzzle piece from the early ST-Project that adds a single track only to one side of the DT (contrary to the new dragable switch, which adds automatically an DT internal switch further down), but I am not sure... I should check that.
thx eggman121!!
double posting, too. sorry ::)
so i checked the puzzle pieces I found in the RAM phase 1 section. It sounds pretty depricated, especially since most of the puzzle pieces in there are draggable now. But anyway, this is what i got:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fu9wGaN2.jpg&hash=cbf00c8b516afc18fc6c2dcc4e27df3cd503dc96)
the paths seem to be legit... a nice seperation of directions.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSBLBkUg.jpg&hash=f19d983f7ef75b309e5a7f534953677f010834e3)
sorry for not adding beautifications and a proper bridge like you, eggman ;).
I will try to build this setup in my region and look how things are going with actual traffic. Sorry for the mess: the NAM team is so into DRI (and the rail equivalent) and puzzle-piece-busting and there's always a lone single functionality which can't be covered by DRIs (yet), preventing them to be fully adopted...
Not much development from me at this stage.
I am working on a quite secret project at the moment ?$%kar&%h and will share the results in due course.
Anyway a little slice of Japan ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FIpBlAvB.jpg&hash=47f59a258e92a1347affff623a826a67460970b0)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FjxteCMm.jpg&hash=aba19f77f50f56a989605c2c87a5cb6ab0342899)
Many thanks to Uki sim who kindly lent me his work on the catenary poles for this project!
-eggman121
can I be the negative/critic guy arroun? :p
But.. the boogies are larger than the rails! :o :laugh:
Any chance to get Uki's caternaries included in the RRW in the future? (as part of NAM installation)
I used them a lot before installing the RRW, even if they are a too high for 7,5m road overpasses, but never minded.
Great to see some development on this side, Eggman! Uki's catenaries models are really beautiful, would have been a shame not to use them for RRW. :)
Hi, I am stunned with all the possibilities we already have with the RRW. Especially in those pics with the bridge made by eggman121 earlier this thread (I've tried to Quote, but that ain't work).
So how do I do the D1 Curve Pattern, that ends in two STR lines?! I've tried to do that like shown in the NAM34 manual, page 11, but I couldn't figure out how to drag the rails.
Thanks y'all and kind regards!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fb2xlQry.gif&hash=6ba1d4d121d6cf8247a054615cc3bc947e1c5705)
be sure the stubs are long enough, otherwise the override is not working correctly. :)
Thanks seaman for helping out :thumbsup: . I have had crazy RL at the moment.
I have condensed the pattern for that piece in the code rewrite so you won't have to drag out as far for the overrides to work. In NAM 35 when it eventuates.
-eggman121
Uki's caternaries and concrete sleepers! Perfect!
@seaman: Thanks a lot! That's a perfect way to show. &apls The pic in the manual is discombobulating though.... Without your help I never would've figured that out. It's not self explaining! And here another question: is there a timeline in the upcoming NAM35/36 for puzzle pieces Street/Road/OWR/Ave over STR or RHW over STR? Those pieces are really missing right now.
Kind regards!
Quote from: markussaage on September 03, 2016, 03:23:27 AM
And here another question: is there a timeline in the upcoming NAM35/36 for puzzle pieces Street/Road/OWR/Ave over STR or RHW over STR? Those pieces are really missing right now.
A few pages back in this thread you may enjoy the sneak peek of swordmasters' promising work on the STR code:
Quote from: Swordmaster on February 26, 2016, 06:28:58 PM
What's more, I've generated a new 128,000 line STR code base. You can expect a serious upgrade to the network's crosslinking possibilities. . .
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9DlakzS.jpg&hash=7d88a35f1e6976a5a13be2417fa6b6d958dab7e1)
(Not fully stable yet, apparently. Think I can sneak in some more lines :D)
@Seaman: Thanks for the clarification. :) I guess I didn't think about to look a little back in this thread to find the answer to my question.
Kind regards!
That's excellent ! &apls &apls
I love it. :thumbsup:
Sorry for the long silence on my end.
I do appreciate that the wait has been long
FARR... too... long... :D
All the FARR
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQZdAoqE.jpg&hash=71b4db33ff5dfb295f1bc8465db98134541b298f)
FARR to Orthogonal curves
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F90dEFKK.jpg&hash=bab986834725bd1ddb7b322e128b8141954ffaa8)
FARR to Orthogonal turnouts
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F08HtM6C.jpg&hash=ccc5b9405b48c787e25aee7e087a44b79845f911)
And did I Mention that the curves and straights.... Slope conform
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlYVr4Ir.jpg&hash=454bc1c31d782c34ca0f4663ec52e2eaaf068230)
This is just some of the stuff I am working on.
Keen to get others opinions :)
All of it is draggable (No Flex or puzzle pieces what so ever ;D )
-eggman121
how's this even possible :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
It's seems some "railways dream" will come true ! :bnn:
The fact that is slope conform is a great improvement, which open a lot of new possibilities.
This is Outstanding work ! :thumbsup:
WOW, WOW and WOW. This game appears to be competing with CS. Thus far, the winner appears to SC4. Who needs SC2013 when SC4 keep on ticking on and on :thumbsup:
What is this? A new picture competition post? ;) :)
It's amazing. We have FARR roads, FARR rails, now we need a few more FARR building, and the party can start! :)
Thank you! :) &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Quote from: eggman121 on September 28, 2016, 02:37:55 PM
Keen to get others opinions :)
uhm... amazing? Gorgeous! Fantastic! What else to say? Well, I really like the RRW "high speed" switch (the one avoiding the x-crossing), so maybe there could be a FARR version for that...
Lovely job there :thumbsup:
QuoteAnd did I Mention that the curves and straights.... Slope conform
this.... &bis& &bis& &bis& &bis& &bis& %BUd%
even for other networks, even the simpliest things, such the simple 1x1 90º curve should be slope conform /&HiPP/% I think I can wake up now. lol
Awesome!
Wow! Incredibly awesome. Thank you for the work you are doing with the rails. I can't wait to see this new RRW come out. These are game changing projects.
My jaw has dropped to the ground.
&apls &apls &apls
Quote from: eggman121 on September 28, 2016, 02:37:55 PM
And did I Mention that the curves and straights.... Slope conform
...
All of it is draggable (No Flex or puzzle pieces what so ever ;D )
You magnificent bastard. &apls ;D
Thanks everyone for the comments and Likes!
Now more on the FARR front ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbV0jJvX.jpg&hash=ea63989bc016af48f6dc911d8496497c80fa2681)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FRkKfnhs.jpg&hash=dea565e2d2ed05025fbb43a447a4d15f5e363d37)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F7gNPLcP.jpg&hash=a2a4d0d649235522caf4c846827f3b4e6b2d740a)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuTVT4G9.jpg&hash=92bf0004f325d539c1cdc833b2c0dcc3de0ea147)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FwdHrgTK.jpg&hash=845a280f73996152d4d00b28bca4b0858a64e1be)
Train time :D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FVLFMBJr.jpg&hash=8fe852cc8e35d9b1f3862b702b4bf890c343d2c9)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fh6U2op4.jpg&hash=ad325720230144440302ef273b792b43699008e5)
A few bugs to iron out. Will do so in the next few days.
Hope you enjoy ;)
-eggman121
Great stuff Stephen! &apls
Witchcraft! :popcorn:
Pure, unadulterated wizardry is what it is. &apls
Nice job here &apls
really nice :)
Loved this until...
Ok so the switch rails feature got disabled, there is no button or anything to press. Can you fix this?
Outstanding work with the FARR &apls &apls Slope tolerance is a huge benefit too; I'm really glad you were able to get that to work!
If you mean the switches used during UDI, perhaps they will be added later, but they are far from a priority. Because of the way rail pathing works, it's actually very time-consuming to add something seemingly so simple. Up to this point in time the RRW has been created without them, because getting the base functionality was prioritised. However this does also create the cycle, where the more new content without them, makes the job of getting them in place that much longer and more daunting.
Whilst I realise some users will miss this functionality, most people are more interested in having better rail functionality and probably don't use UDI all that often. Given the extremely limited resources we have right now, this isn't likely to become a priority any time soon.
Speaking of new functionality ;D
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FVXqFpQw.jpg&hash=c4047f5374d48c35c996d00c742f94418420ebde)
Struggled to fit the whole curve on the screen. Yes it is what you think it is ::)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKJPY2zA.jpg&hash=13d380a61eee76875239fc949383dfdd0d4a3e94)
Lets get a close up with a train on the pass.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FR9oEE4b.jpg&hash=a13d0aad83f8d79c5c39331f42fe8c5b5faaf36c)
Region view with the curve under the cloud. Yep that put into perspective of what is possible with new components with the upcoming NAM edition.
-eggman121
Sweet! $%Grinno$% $%Grinno$%
Love it. Looks so much better than the current look as FARR rail looks funny in the region view and now it looks as if you may have fixed this with draggable rail. Great job and NAM 35 is going to the mother load of all NAM updates. Thank you so much deeply coming from my heart.
As a side note and realizing this is the not the applicable topic, but I have thus far noticed that with draggable networks do look a lot better in the region view than what plopable versions of the like do.
Grid, what grid? What IS a grid?
This is the most impressive demonstration that a group of genial people can create a full fork of a game, even without access to the source code. You people are mod heroes!
Quote from: matias93 on October 17, 2016, 06:40:48 AMGrid, what grid? What IS a grid?
I think it's an obscure term people used back in the days... But I'm not sure.
Impressive!
What happened to these cool Cateneries Eggman?
Quote from: eggman121 on February 12, 2014, 09:13:22 PM
Thanks for all the positive feedback :thumbsup: It really inspires me to continue my work.
Anyway here is what I have been working on lately.
Let the Fun Begin!!! $%Grinno$%
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Turnout1_zps15766474.jpg&hash=6aff9959a54d80d6ed81dee6cfde1a2d245729d5) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Turnout1_zps15766474.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FFAR3Turnout2_zpsd8446c82.jpg&hash=d3715c4f893716b4acfaf004b0c063e5f91410ff) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/FAR3Turnout2_zpsd8446c82.jpg.html)
Ironically it is the FAR3 content which is easiest to apply wires to. Anything with significant curvature across multiple tiles is gonna be a real pain to place wires on correctly. Lucky all my calculations are working out.
-eggman121
Absolutely love those more looking realistic Cateneries with actual wires from pole to pole. WOW, this game is really taking an old XP simple graphic designed game to a whole new realm that is keeping with today's technology.
Quote from: Mikey Knox on November 03, 2016, 06:00:38 AM
What happened to these cool Cateneries Eggman?
On the back burner until FLEX Track and draggable Viaduct Rail is completed. You notice he was working on them a little bit, but it's a spare time project. Not abandoned, but it is postponed since he's basically been the only RRW dev for about a year and a half now, since Willy's second disappearance.
I'm pretty sure he wants to finish it, but when is another matter.
Quote from: APSMS on November 03, 2016, 12:23:24 PM
On the back burner until FLEX Track and draggable Viaduct Rail is completed. You notice he was working on them a little bit, but it's a spare time project. Not abandoned, but it is postponed since he's basically been the only RRW dev for about a year and a half now, since Willy's second disappearance.
I'm pretty sure he wants to finish it, but when is another matter.
Thanks of clearing this up
APSMSYes I do want to finish it but I guess it is function ahead of aesthetics. Being the main rail person in terms of adding extra NAM functionality and working in my part time job (The NAM does not pay my bills) means that I have too choose wisely on the projects I work on. I wish I could do more work on the overhead wire front but that would mean the sacrifice of new content not to mention the myriad of variants that users would request.
So, I do plan to include them, but they may appear on an in developmental project before the RRW.
NAM 35 will hail better and more flexible railways and that is my focus for the moments.
-eggman121
Just a little cosmetic issue:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fw8b7w35.jpg&hash=91f17ed6b8d1e0ccda1b39d771274c9d3b47127c)
I wonder what's up with the orange arrows that appear on the central tiles of FARR-1.5 segments? I assume they were left over from debugging, but they only show up if zones and the like are touching said tiles.
No matter, though; the new RRW is sweet beyond compare, as is NAM 35 in general. Great job, Stephen and company!
&apls
Yeah I probably should have IIDed them better.
That issue will be fixed in the Next NAM edition.
I think I have reached 1000 posts ;D
I have a secret weapon coming so stay tuned!
-eggman121
Secret weapon Revealed ?$%kar&%h
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeGdMuqT.jpg&hash=7bb6cb870123a5480718449b1f165a0bb6dba769)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FToKwhhg.jpg&hash=6234901d3f7617689a577295fb2f8c34160c6792)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FtatskfS.jpg&hash=93c347d09ba8f1dab9f0239a36eea039ea2c5f8a)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FDZqxXYX.jpg&hash=9cd348f15d1baba25f855820b8f6e75f5b3f1506)
All of it is based on an Alpha set run through GoFSH!
Major players in this project are MGB204 and Rivit They have played an immensely important role in making this a reality.
All that is needed to make new sets are a Ballast and Sleeper texture and the rest is automated!
I hope to give a few options for the RRW in the upcoming edition ;)
-eggman121
This is... is... there are no words, just feelings of admiration &apls
Although the current default RRW is closer to the rail textures in my area, I realize that many players are looking for grey rails. This is a stunning addition. You're doing a fine job! :thumbsup:
Automated texture creation like that is seriously the key to prevent people asking for a SAM like rail setup. (which is not possible) Nice work.
Actually it is not. :) The Automated Texture is very nice, but it has the limitation that you only can use one type in each city. Which is way better anyway than using only one texture at all, but the ultimate achivement could be a SAM like setup for all networks... :D :D :D
And yess! I know that is not really possible (technical issues and everything else) anyway.
But yepp, this automated setup the closest thing and it's amazing anyway! :)
Thank you!
This is absolutely fantastic news!
I know RRW developers have felt a little frustrated at times when people have criticised the current textures or continually asked for other options.
Personally I've avoided RRW as I like the greyer colours and would rather have concrete sleepers which are more modern and becoming a lot more common so this pleases me greatly and I now look forward to ripping up all my current railways and using this RRW and fully utilising the superb work that has went into RRW.
I feel that is it is amazing and very thankful for anything that comes out for Rail.
Using RRW will make me enjoy even more and thank you soo much.
I still wish there was a much better transition like slope transition to Maxis Elevated Rail. I understand that Maxis Elevated Rail was not designed for Freight but I can tell you that in my urban areas, there is no Freight at all when I could such a transition.
dyoungyn
Well done Stephen for bringing the automated textures to a point of making them a reality. I'm glad you were able to take the foundation I proposed and run with it. The real beauty here is that if you are planning to release the repositories (I think you are), then this makes the potential options for customisation almost limitless. &apls
Don't like the RRW textures - Now there are no excuses for not using RRW.
Quote from: dyoungyn on November 11, 2016, 05:23:48 AM
I still wish there was a much better transition like slope transition to Maxis Elevated Rail.
That is exactly what the viaduct rail component of the NAM is for.
Quote from: Tyberius06 on November 10, 2016, 06:12:55 PM
Actually it is not. :) The Automated Texture is very nice, but it has the limitation that you only can use one type in each city. Which is way better anyway than using only one texture at all, but the ultimate achivement could be a SAM like setup for all networks...
Let's just say, whilst possible, the sheer amount of additional code means this simply isn't going to happen.
Wow! Nice to see variation options on demand becoming a reality &apls &apls
One wonders if there will be a base texture set made of the upcoming color schemes, for lot making.
Well done Stephen :thumbsup:
Nick
This is actually amazing! This should get some of the stragglers on board with RRW since it seems like their most frequent complaint was textures.
Great work Eggman, MGB, and Rivit! &apls
Quote from: dyoungyn on November 11, 2016, 05:23:48 AM
I still wish there was a much better transition like slope transition to Maxis Elevated Rail.
That is exactly what the viaduct rail component of the NAM is for. (Quoted from MGB 204)
Yes, but that connects from ground rail to viaduct rail and not to Maxis Elevated Rail. There is indeed a transition piece with a rather steep slope up from ground rail to Elevated Rail. Again, I know it sounds ridiculous, but Maxis Elevated Rail is more stable when plopping stations and the like then what Viaduct rail is. Finally, I also again understand the limitations and true nature of ground rail when it comes to Freight. Now, I cannot talk about what NAM 35 has as I have yet to re-install SC4 on any computer as I am waiting on a machine that can handle it. When I talk about stability, with Viaduct, if one hovers over with a transit enable lot, the game shuts down. It is not same with Maxis Elevated Rail.
dyoungyn
Quote from: dyoungyn on November 11, 2016, 08:50:04 AM
When I talk about stability, with Viaduct, if one hovers over with a transit enable lot, the game shuts down. It is not same with Maxis Elevated Rail.
If you have simmaster07's SC4Fix.dll file, that actually (and amazingly) isn't true anymore. Additionally, the RRW will be receiving draggable viaducts, with FLEX OnSlopes.
-Alex
Quote from: dyoungyn on November 11, 2016, 08:50:04 AM
When I talk about stability, with Viaduct, if one hovers over with a transit enable lot, the game shuts down. It is not same with Maxis Elevated Rail.
dyoungyn
My friend, do you run on a MAC?
If not, may I direct you to this little piece (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/30883-sc4fix-third-party-patches-for-sc4/) of awesome?
Just plop it directly in your plugins folder (no sub-directories) for maximum effect. Also, place TE lots next to each other just for kicks.
EDIT: ninja'd. What Alex said.
Quote from: Tarkus on November 11, 2016, 08:59:35 AM
If you have simmaster07's SC4Fix.dll file, that actually (and amazingly) isn't true anymore. Additionally, the RRW will be receiving draggable viaducts, with FLEX OnSlopes.
-Alex
Quote from: APSMS on November 11, 2016, 09:03:20 AM
If not, may I direct you to this little piece (http://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/30883-sc4fix-third-party-patches-for-sc4/) of awesome?
Just plop it directly in your plugins folder (no sub-directories) for maximum effect. Also, place TE lots next to each other just for kicks.
EDIT: ninja'd. What Alex said.
wait... what? holy **** how did I miss that? thx so much! could 've saved soo much wasted lifetime...
Thanks everyone for the overwhelmingly positive response to the automated re texturing project :)
Just a few questions I have to answer.
Quote from: art128 on November 10, 2016, 05:13:49 PM
Automated texture creation like that is seriously the key to prevent people asking for a SAM like rail setup. (which is not possible) Nice work.
Yeah. Well it would be impossible to make a SAM setup workable so this is the next best thing and as asymptotically close as you will get to a SAM setup.
Quote from: mgb204 on November 11, 2016, 07:11:45 AM
Well done Stephen for bringing the automated textures to a point of making them a reality. I'm glad you were able to take the foundation I proposed and run with it. The real beauty here is that if you are planning to release the repositories (I think you are), then this makes the potential options for customisation almost limitless. &apls
Don't like the RRW textures - Now there are no excuses for not using RRW.
Robin, You had a big part to play in this as well. Your insight made this all possible! So my metaphorical hat is off to you :thumbsup:
The release of the repositories will get released but it is all dependent of GoFSH. That is
Rivit's tool and the key to unlocking the potential of this automation of textures. So that brings in
Rivit into the equation. To keep things up to date and to avoid missing sets I will release and share with a few custodians of the D0 sets to keep everything in check. From there a few sets can be created. I am all for collaboration :)
Quote from: Simmer2 on November 11, 2016, 07:26:45 AM
Wow! Nice to see variation options on demand becoming a reality &apls &apls
One wonders if there will be a base texture set made of the upcoming color schemes, for lot making.
Well done Stephen :thumbsup:
Thanks
Nick. I know you have made many RRW Lot textures and am keen to get you on board!
The automated scripting allows for making Lot textures as well. GoFSH was behind the NCD RRW textures pack update and I plan to make some D0's to accompany that project!
In the meantime it is possible to edit your current textures for automation readiness assuming you have them in the layers of Ballast, Sleepers and Rails.
I will talk with you privately in the meantime.
Thanks everyone else for the feedback ()stsfd()
-eggman121 (Stephen)
Just dropping these here ::)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBhMwvvs.jpg&hash=d84963e854cf4c8042739f20346b6293d5580b9b)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FELapJng.jpg&hash=21a0950f342502daa65dbf6a4260c41669920208)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUsBKrjM.jpg&hash=19abcf1ca696d00cceac4c82743e64ca0c99b831)
A product of rivit, mgb204 and myself.
-eggman121
&apls
I. NEED. THOSE. TEXTURES. :D
I love seeing those 7.5m viaducts! Hopefully they'll be in the next NAM version!
Sumptuously! I really want it! Bravo! &apls &apls &apls
Stunning work with the textures. I like the original RRW colour, but this new one is very nice. I'm actually considering, that I will change my rail lines to this one. And that L1 elevated rail (with the track textures which contains those middle "stabilizer" metal sticks - sorry I'm not an expert, I don't know how they call those things, not even in hungarian), I would like to use as soon as possible, especially those STR crossings - I've just run into that issue in one of my developing cities that I don't have Diag Elevated DTR-Ground Ortho STR crossing.
I can't wait these new gems! :) :popcorn:
&apls &apls &apls
L1 RRW!!!!!!!!!!!! &apls &apls &apls &apls :bnn: :bnn:
Wow!
Much possibilities,
Such need! :O
Is it going to be possible to have the old texture for STR and the new texture for DTR ?
As has been stated often since the inception of RRW, the Real Railway is more than a texture change. RRW relates to a change in gauge and complete overhaul of Rail within the NAM. Just as the original game came with default rail textures, so does RRW, albeit quite a different set.
But textures are just that, you are free to swap textures about and change the appearance of your rails. You can do this for STR only if you prefer too. The problem, currently no such alternative texture set exists.
So technically possible yes, but if your question is about official support in the NAM installer for old non-RRW textures. That is not going to happen. But you are free to mod things that way if you like.
Many of the IDs used by RRW are either completely new content or have been altered from the originals. So if you want to use an existing set of textures, that would necessitate altering IDs and making many new textures for complete coverage. Additionally (not applicable to STR), the pathing has been altered for the new gauge of RRW. So if your new textures don't match the updated gauge, automata running upon them may look wrong. It's totally possible to re-create the Maxis rail textures and use them with RRW. However, it would be a lot of work, I'd wait for the RRW Automation project to get released. When that's ready, the number of options for rail textures is going to increase very quickly.
Spot the variety ;)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTJVfCED.jpg&hash=c8b0dc1086d1051b8181a514f8ffb43dd22d9730)
With the Road Viaduct OST being rail based it is indeed possible to make an alternate set of modern viaducts.
Orthogonal for now but they will be expanded upon in future NAM editions.
-eggman121
Oh dear... Do you have a life? :D wonderful!
Is this for real!? You are my hero :laugh:
This is insane!!!! &apls &apls &apls &apls
eggman121, I believe in you! &apls &apls &apls
These look amazing, and I must have missed the 7.5m viaducts - excited for those also! Are these like SAM, whereby you can change between them, or do you have one installed? And are they all dragable?
Hello everyone. Just here to answer some questons ;) Thanks for all the comments and likes!
Quote from: kbieniu7 on January 15, 2017, 02:28:24 PM
Oh dear... Do you have a life?
I hope I do :D , Would not be making this content otherwise ;D . I am kind of on a blitz mission to make as much content as I can before study starts in March.
Quote from: matias93 on January 15, 2017, 05:54:30 PM
Is this for real!? You are my hero :laugh:
Thanks, yep, would not consider myself to be a hero :D , Just a humble modder.
Quote from: Gugu3 on January 16, 2017, 01:09:59 AM
This is insane!!!! &apls &apls &apls &apls
Sure is. Thanks :)
Quote from: Alan_Waters on January 16, 2017, 09:38:07 AM
eggman121, I believe in you! &apls &apls &apls
I believe I can get the work done as well. Thanks!
Quote from: michae95l on January 16, 2017, 10:17:30 AM
These look amazing, and I must have missed the 7.5m viaducts - excited for those also! Are these like SAM, whereby you can change between them, or do you have one installed? And are they all dragable?
Thanks for the questions. Both will be able to be used concurrently due to this fact...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FnoYXNJL.jpg&hash=6f84984bd6cbb45a646c01e068591e52ded4b038)
As you see, the road OST is actually Rail Based. This is what the modern viaducts are based off.
So as you may see in this picture trains can use it as a result.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FA5jpCS4.jpg&hash=4786c454d1e214af776926aa8cfc359c47d5a5e5)
All my work is flex or draggable. puzzle pieces are exception to the rule as far as my work goes ::)
So I should be able to make the orthogonal crossings for Maxis, RHW and NWM networks. They will only be orthogonal for now. Diagonals later ;)
The other viaducts will have diagonal however.
-eggman121
Whoa, that looks nice!! Looking forward to using those two different styles of rail viaducts!
Those are looking very good. I can't wait to build a new rail line using these gems.
One question: is that possible to make a transition piece between the 7,5m and 15m "on slope"? How I mean is each side of the ramp 7,5 the other side 15m and there is no level diffences, it's just a straight line. Like the 7,5 runs on ground level and the 15 runs on -7,5m. Is that possible to connect them like this or making such transitions?
Thanks for all the comments and likes everyone!
First crossing of the modern ERRW....
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FeLYYKZv.jpg&hash=95f33765db19f03aefe9905aaf890ba0f7f60b0d)
Quote from: Tyberius06 on January 16, 2017, 04:05:14 PM
One question: is that possible to make a transition piece between the 7,5m and 15m "on slope"? How I mean is each side of the ramp 7,5 the other side 15m and there is no level diffences, it's just a straight line. Like the 7,5 runs on ground level and the 15 runs on -7,5m. Is that possible to connect them like this or making such transitions?
It is indeed possible but not high priority yet. I still need to make the L2 variants. But that being said the transition you are talking about is on the list.
-eggman121
I am in love with RRW! :P
Incredible gorgeous stuff. SC4 rail rules!
A. Lurker
Wow! &dance
That is the kind of stuff that didn't seemed to be needed when it didn't exist but that immediately becomes a need when we see it. Our way in the sin :D That is excellent :thumbsup:
Thanks for all the nice comments and likes everyone :thumbsup:
Here is the latest development...
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FaFgKQEP.jpg&hash=4849f686bf56da71350d859c3bab2a5526dbade7)
Can't wait to see this in some of your cities once the work is complete.
-eggman121
Looks exciting, all drggable I assume! What about going over AVE6/7 and RHW all LO networks?
It's really awesome! &apls &apls
Just a few question:
- is this a total different work from what was made by Swordmaster (Willy), or you continued his work? Or was that a team work anyway? Maybe I recall wrongly but I remember he has been working on L1 viaducts as well and a lot of L2 transitions.
- how about SAM transitions (different SAM textures including mgb's Industrial SAM version)?
- different GLR options? TiR, ToR, TiA etc?
Anyway this is good, really good.
Thank you!
- Tyberius
Hello everyone. Just here to reply to some comments.
Quote from: dyoungyn on January 18, 2017, 09:24:04 PM
Looks exciting, all drggable I assume! What about going over AVE6/7 and RHW all LO networks?
Those are on the cards. I do plan to extend the functionality to that area as well.
Quote from: Tyberius06 on January 18, 2017, 11:52:24 PM
Just a few question:
- is this a total different work from what was made by Swordmaster (Willy), or you continued his work? Or was that a team work anyway? Maybe I recall wrongly but I remember he has been working on L1 viaducts as well and a lot of L2 transitions.
- how about SAM transitions (different SAM textures including mgb's Industrial SAM version)?
- different GLR options? TiR, ToR, TiA etc?
Thanks
Tyberius for the questions.
There should be the same OxO functionality for those networks listed as well.
Swordmaster Did a bit of work in this arena a year ago but he has since been MIA for a while now. The work I did on the FlexTrack component got his attention and drew him back but than he went into hiding again. If I was not around there is a fair bet that the RRW would not have been as advanced as it is today. That is my assumption anyhow.
Swordmaster however left a large set of code and files in his time and I have been adjusting those and extending them for release. Finding the time to do the
pathing along with all the other projects I have going on is proving difficult however. I am still working out the best way too extend the functionality for the user base since we really are down to a few NAM Team members now. That aside we are doing the best in the circumstance and that may result in some functionality limitation.
Hopefully that offers some clarity.
That is all for now.
-eggman121
Thank you for the answers. I'm glad that you are working this project. The flex tracks are awesome I love playing with them. &apls :)
- Tyberius
Hello everyone :)
Here is some more development in the RRW field!
https://www.youtube.com/v/fuWSCGa4GUA&feature
()flower()
-eggman121
??? ??? ??? Is this even real!? :o :o :o
I wouldn't believe it if it weren't for the adjacency issues when mixing all RHW at once, which is a very unusual situation.
As I said before (in fact, did I say it?): the L1 rail is going to be my new elevated metro, is just too beautiful and flexible, it only needs some stations but the rest of the creator community can take charge of it :-\
And a little offtopic: if someone that is not working on bringing this wonders has already learnt, it would be nice to see some guide to the draggable FARRW, which looks much easier on the video than when trying to get something done ()testing()
That looks truly incredible. I cannot wait!
&apls I'm just blown away. I was like... ok, draggable ERRW, we knew that was coming. But then you covered all additional features as well, even MHO and single track RRW underpasses... (wait for it) ... diagonal!!! Multi radius curves... oh what joy and wonders :bnn:
I'm pretty speechless....wow. I can't wait to use this. Awesome work, thankyou so much.
This "NAM Secret weapon" is actually a terrific improvement of the RRW. :)
A few years ago, no one could have believed that possible one day. ::)
The future NAM will undoubtedly be beyond all expectations! &apls &apls &apls
Thanks for all the nice reply's everyone :thumbsup:
Yep, This is a big deal. ;D
Quote from: matias93 on February 17, 2017, 09:56:29 PM
I wouldn't believe it if it weren't for the adjacency issues when mixing all RHW at once, which is a very unusual situation.
Yeah. Lucky it was spotted. Some RHW code was interfering. I am investigating now.
Quote from: matias93 on February 17, 2017, 09:56:29 PM
And a little offtopic: if someone that is not working on bringing this wonders has already learnt, it would be nice to see some guide to the draggable FARRW, which looks much easier on the video than when trying to get something done ()testing()
I can make a video for the FARRW if you would like ;) I do acknowledge it is a bit confusing too drag out.
-eggman121
Woooot!! &apls &apls
So looking forward to getting my hands on this great work of yours. :thumbsup: &apls
What's next? EFARRW?
Seriously, though, this is great work. Multiple height levels and STR support, along with NWM and RHW compatibility? I know you've been busy, but man, you've been busy!
Looking forward to whatever else you might have in the pipeline. Thanks for all the hard work &apls
WOW!!!!!!! I didn't even notice the L1 Elevated Rail. Simply put, WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Blow way out the park and over the water. Ditto on L1 Elevated Rail stations. Is AVE6/7 able to go underneath also?
What's the way to make that ?
Thanks in advance
Quote from: eggman121 on September 28, 2016, 02:37:55 PM
Sorry for the long silence on my end.
I do appreciate that the wait has been long
FARR... too... long... :D
All the FARR
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQZdAoqE.jpg&hash=71b4db33ff5dfb295f1bc8465db98134541b298f)
FARR to Orthogonal curves
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F90dEFKK.jpg&hash=bab986834725bd1ddb7b322e128b8141954ffaa8)
FARR to Orthogonal turnouts
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F08HtM6C.jpg&hash=ccc5b9405b48c787e25aee7e087a44b79845f911)
And did I Mention that the curves and straights.... Slope conform
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlYVr4Ir.jpg&hash=454bc1c31d782c34ca0f4663ec52e2eaaf068230)
This is just some of the stuff I am working on.
Keen to get others opinions :)
All of it is draggable (No Flex or puzzle pieces what so ever ;D )
-eggman121
Quote from: yann on February 19, 2017, 05:18:13 AM
What's the way to make that ?
Actually, there should be a RRW guide pdf in your NAM documentation folder. The pictures in there are pretty self explaining and this should help you to get started. But I must admit it will take some time to get used to it. Additionally, the team implemented small arrows to appear in game to help you drag the tracks in the right way. After some training, you will learn to interpret them correctly.
Seaman+Yann: Those are new, not yet released.
Yann: But good point about the PDF.
Could use some better instructions on how to draw the tracks to get different configurations.
nothing dramatic or clever to add... :popcorn:
but a round of &apls
results of work are so good :)
gets me all :crytissue:
train peel away :bnn:
:popcorn:
Fantastic work!
What else is there to say?
This is mind blowing!So many possibilities available! &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Just a curiosity, not making a point, will the L1 and L2 be able to cross each other at some stage of the development?
Quote from: eggman121 on October 20, 2014, 03:00:37 AM
Quote from: art128 on October 19, 2014, 03:23:32 PM
If I recall correctly, they (the NAM team) said it would be added to the NAM in two versions as the focus of the next one wasn't on the RRW stuff yet.
I'd say I agree with that though. It's best to have a good, thoughtfully tested version of a mod before making it public. I'd personally hate to see this mod rushed so that it meets the next NAM release date. (not that there is one, "It will be released when it is ready" )
The last and only time a NAM was released with a release date (NAM 31.0) it was half baked and put the team under pressure to fix the issues. Much of the team at the moment have heavy RL so it is hard to quantify what will and will not go in the next NAM. The HSRP version I am making is piggybacking on top of the current HSRP at the moment. I will have to discuss further what direction the HSRP will take. At the moment I am just experimenting with ideas for what people would like in a future NAM beyond NAM 33.
Anyways here are some more pictures of the HSRP next to the RRW
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FRealHSRRRW1_zpsb1ff18a8.jpg&hash=4ef2277fb08f5306423793d4b965179bd0f79645) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RealHSRRRW1_zpsb1ff18a8.jpg.html)
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi245.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg72%2FEggman121%2FRealHSRRRW2_zpsb9847233.jpg&hash=005c12469241d93f6940c7ea158caa88c97be11d) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RealHSRRRW2_zpsb9847233.jpg.html)
Enjoy ()flower()
-eggman121
Impossible to find this. It is public ?
Also, my english is not too good but i follow your adventure since the page 47. Congratulation for all your work, your determination and your skills.
Likewise i come back to my home country after 2 years in Melbourne and Australia so it's a pleasure to come back on SC4 and continue to see NSW train and picture of melbourne haha
Good luck for your next work and keep going !
Quote from: anthony16s on March 03, 2017, 02:23:32 AM
Quote from: eggman121 on October 20, 2014, 03:00:37 AM
Quote from: art128 on October 19, 2014, 03:23:32 PM
If I recall correctly, they (the NAM team) said it would be added to the NAM in two versions as the focus of the next one wasn't on the RRW stuff yet.
I'd say I agree with that though. It's best to have a good, thoughtfully tested version of a mod before making it public. I'd personally hate to see this mod rushed so that it meets the next NAM release date. (not that there is one, "It will be released when it is ready" )
The last and only time a NAM was released with a release date (NAM 31.0) it was half baked and put the team under pressure to fix the issues. Much of the team at the moment have heavy RL so it is hard to quantify what will and will not go in the next NAM. The HSRP version I am making is piggybacking on top of the current HSRP at the moment. I will have to discuss further what direction the HSRP will take. At the moment I am just experimenting with ideas for what people would like in a future NAM beyond NAM 33.
Anyways here are some more pictures of the HSRP next to the RRW
Enjoy ()flower()
-eggman121
Impossible to find this. It is public ?
As it says on the quoted text, it hasn't been released and there is no date for release, as standard NAM policy. In any case, I first this project could be somehow benefited from the latter developments on the RRW. There is no guarantee of it, though, and we should be patient: the NAM team is doing an astounding amount of work, only on their free time!
Awesome!!! :thumbsup: &apls
Ground rail and elevated rail connected with draggable version! I will waiting for this! :popcorn:
;Hi :)
But do you have any others textures for GHSR ? i have already the "vershner" one. But nothing like the last picture i post
Quote from: anthony16s on March 05, 2017, 03:33:22 PM
;Hi :)
But do you have any others textures for GHSR ? i have already the "vershner" one. But nothing like the last picture i post
It hasn't been released yet. I know that what you quoted was from two years ago, but it still hasn't been released.
Hello everyone
Yes I did do some experimental stuff on the HSR front a while ago but I am using the RRW as a test bed for the functionality for that component. Once I get the RRW into shape I plan to port over some of the principles and code for this mod.
But as the NAM team has such few developers at this stage there is no timeline for the eventuate of the mod. I consider it to be a long term project. It will take a while to make and code but I will still try to tackle it in the future.
With the RRW FARR and the upcoming Elevated RRW or ERRW there is a better chance of it eventuating.
We have a bit to make and will take some time.
Quote from: anthony16s on March 05, 2017, 03:33:22 PM
;Hi :)
But do you have any others textures for GHSR ? i have already the "vershner" one. But nothing like the last picture i post
The problem is with the for the HSRP is that the textures are not compatible with the new textures. The new HSR will have functionality that rivals the RRW but since the ERRW is in construction and the new HSR has alot of bridges it may take a while to make the set that is specific to the new HSR.
I hope that answers some of the questions.
-eggman121
eggman,
no stress. We all appreciate what you've done so far for SC4 railways. Just keep at it; no need to hurry or worry about future projects. I think we have confidence that it will be ready when it's ready.
I think of it like the Heinz ketchup in a glass bottle; you've got us in anticipation of great things, so we'll be glad to wait. Honestly the last thing we want is for you to feel overwhelmed and get burned out. Hopefully the automation and such that Robin and Ron have worked on texture-wise should take a lot of the stress off you needing to satisfy everyone's texture fiddliness and whims.
-Absalom
Thank you for your answers.
Again, I am really admiring for all the work already done. congratulations
I can agree with APSMS. I've been playing with this game for 13 years or so, always in and out (at the moment IN), I'm pretty sure, that if I eventually skip a few years of playing, I will be return some point, so I'm patient I know, you and the other developers make a very nice and good job for us, so I can always get some fun stuff from you guys! :)
Thank you!
- Tyberius
That's truly amazing :o I'm scared to see what bill you're going to send to us after releasing it :D Just wish, it was similiar with tramway network!
IIRC, there was a discussion about making a MODDING tutorial video. If such a tutorial has been made, can someone post a link?
Hello. :)
Am having some issues with RRW recently.
When using the flextracks to do some FARR the game takes some time to actually do them. I had this issue in the past but it affected STR on LHD setups. The issue was missing paths.
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FsH4XnsL.jpg&hash=45d27fec188a3353e8b47508938b3b34d369d77a)
According to that picture, there are no paths on the FARR but the wide radius curves and turnouts are fine. (and they are done perfectly fine too)
It's a fresh NAM install on a LHD install. (both game and NAM set to LHD) Just your typical install with some stuff (bridges etc) not selected. (which shouldn't matter anyway)
Any ideas how to resolve this?
I wouldn't mind too much if it was just missing paths, but the fact it takes some time to actually make the tracks is annoying.
Thanks in advance. :)
A lot of the time the LHD paths might not be ready when new features appear. This has already been completed, a patch can be found here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1444.msg515359#msg515359). :).
The issue with the slow build is something the game does, because it's looking for paths that don't exist. We can't really do anything about that, the solution is having the paths.
Working perfectly as intended, thank you! &apls &apls
It's alive!!!
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0iWvySs.jpg&hash=64761742eb636e08ecd2b1dfa3992e4d11687a4e)
Before some people jump up down about the piece the NAM Team does have some room to move upon requests.
If you don't like it upon NAM 36 you always have the option not to use it in your cities.
Apart from realism, playing styles and requests are considered and although it may not suit everyone's expectations we have to cater for different playing styles.
So... A preemptive request, Please don't start arguments about the realism of the piece. It has been made because the is demand for it and it would be a deal breaker for some people to use the RRW (especially the ERRW).
-eggman121
Edit: (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FkFIqkdc.jpg&hash=1e96429c5fe233eceda026848c90aff4ed48812e)
Notice that the piece slope conforms! So there are other situations for this piece.
Cool!
I like, I like alot
Quote from: eggman121 on June 11, 2017, 11:00:27 PM
...If you don't like it [...] you always have the option not to use it in your cities...
=> this
Thank you (and the NAM team of course) for all the work you do so we can have a better game &apls
Hi!
Is it a new and longer modell? I don't understand the complaints against rail ramps. This year I was travelling a lot across Europe by train and I saw several times similiar ramps near the the main stations and terminals to save rooms. Check Zuerich, that was jawdropping to me. So I don't have any problem the idea of ramps.
My only wish is could you fill the "holes" and make the ramp model without "holes"/"underways" until the end of the ramp? OR some similiar style like the road ramps would be even better.
Anyway it's a great job, thanks for sharing!
- Tyberius
Rail ramps are typically more common for light rail. On heavy rail trains, notably in the US but also elsewhere around the world ramps are very rare even for electrified lines due to the limiting factor that weight plays on allowing the tractive effort of the motors to overcome the tendency of steel on steel contact friction to slip under strong gravitational forces.
Although this is not the case for light-rail lines, generally a 1% grade is steep for a heavy rail track, and anything above 3% is virtually unheard of. The Big Boy locomotive was designed to navigate 1.5% (IIRC) with sections up to ~2%. I think one of the steepest (non-rack) railways in the world moves uphill at close to 3 or 4% but it's very slow going.
That being said, gameplay is going to have to trump realism for me. I never use the ramp piece anymore, but I wholeheartedly approve of its inclusion if it encourages adoption of the RRW project.
Oh boy. I really like the look of the ramp. You've made it longer than the old one, right? I think esp. for the 7.5m ERRW ramps might be useful and somewhat realistic at the same time. I've really missed a piece like that to build hight differences between tracks right next to each other to optain something like this:
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fde.academic.ru%2Fpictures%2Fdewiki%2F72%2FHauptbahnhof_Wuerzburg.jpg&hash=ace129ba1510f5b5ce53b105a6c7fe9237977adb)
@eggman: maybe a ramp from 15m to 7.5m might be something to consider (without daring to speak of those handy flex HTs of the RHW). Such a ramp would make it feasable to build something like this:
(https://luftbildshs.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/db-testzug_077.jpg)
Quote from: Tyberius06 on June 12, 2017, 01:06:40 AM
My only wish is could you fill the "holes" and make the ramp model without "holes"/"underways" until the end of the ramp? OR some similiar style like the road ramps would be even better.
actually, I really like the combination of both in the current version. I think it fits pretty nicely to the current "brick-design" of the ERRW. In my humble opinion, I would join Tyberius wish in case you want to create another ramp for the "modern" concrete ERRW design.
I've had always used the ramps for my railroads because they don't use too much space, something very useful in already developed zones. Sure those ramps are a bit steep, but that was not a problem for me. After all, my trains were made by lighter materials and were equipped with stronger engines. But the new smoother ramp looks beautiful. Keep it up. I just wander if you're going to include both the older and the new ramps at the next NAM.
Good to see it in game. :thumbsup:
Not sure I like the ramp conforms to the terrain.
You would make it like that in real life. There you would make the top straight more or less.
Now I am just waiting on the shorter version (6 tile long) that I also did.
Awesome work eggman! I can't wait to see what goodies are in store for the RRW in NAM 36. I'm still getting used to all the possibilities that the drag-able FAR has opened up in NAM 35.
Speaking of elevated railways... I remember back in the day that Swordmaster mentioned something about possible L1 RRW pieces. For example, I would love to be able to dip a road down 7.5m and have it run under a railroad... Is something like that still being planned for a future RRW expansion?
I deeply agree that without imaginative creations from the entire NAM team, SC4 would not be anywhere close than what it is today. Thank so much for sharing and forever great-full for keeping the game alive and strong.
The fact that 7.5 Elevated Rail is beyond what was thought and you eggman brought this to reality is by fare exceeding any expectations from anyone.
Agree with above! Good to have it &apls &apls
Quote from: Simcoug on June 12, 2017, 07:26:54 AM
Awesome work eggman! I can't wait to see what goodies are in store for the RRW in NAM 36. I'm still getting used to all the possibilities that the drag-able FAR has opened up in NAM 35.
Speaking of elevated railways... I remember back in the day that Swordmaster mentioned something about possible L1 RRW pieces. For example, I would love to be able to dip a road down 7.5m and have it run under a railroad... Is something like that still being planned for a future RRW expansion?
Isn't that what FLUPS are for ? Alternatively I've set my city to dip the road 3.5m and have the railroad on a 3.5m embankment. Don't mind setting up my cities with future NAM expansion in mind. In Toronto we have some old underpasses with only 3.5m clearance.
Quote from: Kitsune on June 12, 2017, 10:18:06 AM
Quote from: Simcoug on June 12, 2017, 07:26:54 AM
Awesome work eggman! I can't wait to see what goodies are in store for the RRW in NAM 36. I'm still getting used to all the possibilities that the drag-able FAR has opened up in NAM 35.
Speaking of elevated railways... I remember back in the day that Swordmaster mentioned something about possible L1 RRW pieces. For example, I would love to be able to dip a road down 7.5m and have it run under a railroad... Is something like that still being planned for a future RRW expansion?
Isn't that what FLUPS are for ? Alternatively I've set my city to dip the road 3.5m and have the railroad on a 3.5m embankment. Don't mind setting up my cities with future NAM expansion in mind. In Toronto we have some old underpasses with only 3.5m clearance.
In my experience, FLUP is less tolerant of changes. It would take at least three pieces (two for the underpass, and one for the flup connection). I'd rather take the two slope pieces for the RRW and drag a road under it.
I do like the direction this is going. The slope is a good piece. I'm also looking forward to an on-slope transition similar to the L1 on-slope pieces so I can dip the road myself. Then there is the problem of the NAM multi-level station (0m/15m) that I wish could be lowered to 0/7.5 for better options.
Hey, is there documentation of how to draw RRW multi-radius curves anywhere? I can't find anything for the life of me — there's the videos on YouTube that kinda touch on it, but nothing written?
Quote from: tomvsotis on August 14, 2017, 01:13:35 PM
Hey, is there documentation of how to draw RRW multi-radius curves anywhere? I can't find anything for the life of me — there's the videos on YouTube that kinda touch on it, but nothing written?
Hi
There is a PDF titled (
Real Railway Flex Track user manual)
That document will contain most the patterns for turnouts and curves for the RRW.
It is found in the NAM Auxiliary folder in the SC4 Documents Folder.
Hope that helps.
-eggman121
Damn, many thanks for both the quick response and the information. Much appreciated!
Is it possible to make STR connect to neighbouring Citys?
Quote from: Mikey Knox on September 19, 2017, 04:59:49 PM
Is it possible to make STR connect to neighbouring Citys?
Sure can. The STR is a single tile network so there should not be any problem with that functionality.
-eggman121
Ah ok, i wasnt sure because there where DTR Tracks in the other City, not STR.
Thx
That will always be the case, it's not possible for such overrides to be automatically carried over. Although once overridden to STR, everything will function (in fact it will work even if you don't).
Is Rivit's zRUM for RRW still needed/compatible with NAM36, i noticed his custom Rail Viaduct Styles i installed dont show up anymore for me, and there are Path fixes in the Folders where i dont know what they do now.
Thank you
Yes and no. As part of our efforts to get many of the RUM for RRW updates incorporated into the NAM files, a lot of the content is no longer required. However, the full process was not completed and will take until NAM 37 before everything is in synch. My advice, don't alter anything right now, but wait for a new release of RUM for RRW, which is in the works. This shouldn't cause any harm either.
As for the Rail Viaduct Styles, since RUM overrides the NAM, there is no reason why they should have stopped working. But do bear in mind that the textures used for the Draggable RRW are not the same as the old Puzzle Piece variants, so you won't see them on E-RRW pieces. Again, that's something a future RUM update would need to address.
I noticed there are no starter pieces for the draggable viaducts. Will these be implemented later?
Also, are there any L1 viaduct stations yet? I don't believe I've seen any...
Why would you need a dedicated starter piece? If you think about it, to get to the point of needing an elevated viaduct, at some point you'd need to use either a ramp or on-slope piece.
Of course there may be situations where users want to use more extensively utilise the E-RRW system too. In such cases you can use the on-slope transition piece, without a slope, in lieu of a regular starter, simply remove that piece once the ERRW is stable. Less menu clutter, more efficient code, less work for the team, yadayadayada.
Currently there are no L1 stations, the team is planning on adding some in future.
Wouldnt a starter piece give use additional stability? ie if you have rhw with a 1 tile median, atleast the L1 is unable to cross. With a starter in the middle, it would be able to cross.
Also, it seems the L1 over diagonal road does not work - it resorts to L0 / ground level.
Quote from: Kitsune on September 25, 2017, 12:45:42 PM
Wouldnt a starter piece give use additional stability? ie if you have rhw with a 1 tile median, atleast the L1 is unable to cross. With a starter in the middle, it would be able to cross.
Also, it seems the L1 over diagonal road does not work - it resorts to L0 / ground level.
The code base is sufficient that only placing a blank rail tile will convert to a ERRW tile at the end of a crossing. No starters needed.
L1 over diag networks except for the RRW is unsupported at this time. Only orthogonal x orthogonal crossings are implemented due to the fact that models have not been made yet for other crossings.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on September 25, 2017, 01:31:41 PM
L1 over diag networks except for the RRW is unsupported at this time. Only orthogonal x orthogonal crossings are implemented due to the fact that models have not been made yet for other crossings.
-eggman121
Well that answers a question I needed answered. I do have one though regarding the difference between the puzzle based and dragged version though. I noticed the draggable version has no barrier in the median of RHW crossings. Is this going to implemented in the future? If not can you tell me where I can find the correct file to edit :D
For now the models used are not intended to be changed.
Old models can be found in the Network Addon Mod folder under rail, the .dat for the Rail viaducts should be pretty obvious. (useful for re-using the old model as a template)
The new models can be found in the y_RealRailway folder in z___NAM, again the .dat file should be obviously named. The ERRW was split into L1 and L2 dats, so you'll need to edit both. The IDs though are identical for both sets, L1 starts 5D6xxxxx and L2 starts 5D7xxxxx.
Can't be more specific as I don't have access to a NAM install right now.
(https://i.imgur.com/UmpdBcn.jpg)
::)
-eggman121
Sweet! &apls
Very nice!
I'm still learning the new stuff in 36...thanks for all your hard work! I love what you've done with the RRW, it's awesome.
Cheers, tiger
WOW!!
Best widest RRW ever! &apls &apls &apls
I'm enjoying the new draggable, elevated RRWs but have noticed a problem: the L1 can't cross over other rails but just converts them to L1 as well. Is this a known issue or is there something I'm doing wrong? Thanks :)
EDIT: I guess ortho crossings work but diagonal won't, even for roads. I thought that those were actually possible with the old version Willy made.
Ah yes. Only Orthogonal Crossing Orthogonal Work for L1. The Models did not exist back in the NAM 36 cycle.
Sorry for the delayed response. I have had work.
-eggman121
NAM is what makes this 14+ years old game still one of my favorites, and with each relase I love it more and more... Specially the RRW part of it :)
@eggman121
Thank you for taking time to develop all thee new features and sharing with all of us who are into SC4. &apls
I can't imagine how you manage it to find all the time to do the developing of new feature, I hardly manage to find the time to play this great game and explore alll the new feature for an hour or two in weeks.
-Do yo plan to implement TTR & QTR in the future?
Greetings from Slovakia.
Quote from: bluephoenix on November 26, 2017, 07:39:57 AM
NAM is what makes this 14+ years old game still one of my favorites, and with each relase I love it more and more... Specially the RRW part of it :)
@eggman121
Thank you for taking time to develop all thee new features and sharing with all of us who are into SC4. &apls
I can't imagine how you manage it to find all the time to do the developing of new feature, I hardly manage to find the time to play this great game and explore alll the new feature for an hour or two in weeks.
-Do yo plan to implement TTR & QTR in the future?
Greetings from Slovakia.
Thanks for the accolade
bluephoenixI really appreciate the comments and I am so glad that you enjoy the work the NAM team does ;D
As for TTR and QTR. They may take a while to eventuate. There are some mechanics that need to be sorted out first.
-eggman121
Hi!
I bring this here from the NAM Support thread.
"It's an RRW related issue but I guess still NAM.
Well I ran into something strange with RRW. I draw all of them with the same way, still this R3-R STR turnout Compaund is not working in every rotation/direction. See attached picture.
or I miss something, but I tried a couple of way and this had happened all the time. (Oh, It doesn't matter if I draw further the "broken" ones, still won't convert into STR...)
Thanks for any help in advance!"
- Tyberius
Quote from: Tyberius06 on January 12, 2018, 02:01:09 PM
"It's an RRW related issue but I guess still NAM.
Well I ran into something strange with RRW. I draw all of them with the same way, still this R3-R STR turnout Compaund is not working in every rotation/direction. See attached picture.
or I miss something, but I tried a couple of way and this had happened all the time. (Oh, It doesn't matter if I draw further the "broken" ones, still won't convert into STR...)
That's odd... I just tried on my own and had difficulties, too. But the problem is not consistent for me. Sometimes I can reproduce it, sometimes not. I pretty sure I did the exact same pattern ()what()
(https://i.imgur.com/s1O4Mpl.jpg)
@Seaman, note that both glitched turnout is a double track one, and the sucessful ones are STR: maybe you mixed the drawing patterns there? I've failed on that so much times already :-[
Quote from: matias93 on January 12, 2018, 06:36:19 PM
@Seaman, note that both glitched turnout is a double track one, and the sucessful ones are STR: maybe you mixed the drawing patterns there? I've failed on that so much times already :-[
I thought so too, that's why I was especially careful to drag the same patterns. In fact, the DTR/STR is the problem here: the two on the left should be overridden to STR as well. On the diagonal branch, the override is already in place (the switch). Also, I was just recreating Tyberius finding; that's reducing the risk that the user might be the problem?
BTW: In many situations, the RRW is ridiculous stable, easy to drag and well crafted. That's why I'm still not sure what's going on here.
Eggmann already answered the problem in the chat helpdesk room.
Quoteeggman121 - Today at 8:01 AM
Issue with the INRULs. Will be fixed in nam 37
- Tyberius
Sorry for the long....................Long Silence on my end.
RL :thumbsdown:
But I will be getting back into the swing of things and fixing this issue in one of the top priorities.
I just need to edit the INRUL section to avoid the conflict in the Flextrack Drag rail.
Moving forward I will make more pieces with Flex Technology. That is piece that can be placed down and they will have the same functions as the draggable counterparts and more stability to boot ;)
This will take some time however.
-eggman121
Where are the electrified lines?
Quote from: alvaro_mox on February 09, 2018, 09:21:01 AM
Where are the electrified lines?
Catenaries? The mods that include them aren't fully compatible with the new parts of the RRW, so they will appear interrupted at curves and fractionally angled tracks. Eggman is working parallelly on a new and more flexible implementation, but that's far from his first priorities at the moment
Hello everyone
Long time no post.
I have finally fixed up the issue concerning the INRUL interference and the updated code will ship with NAM 37...
(https://i.imgur.com/JZmw6iP.jpg)
I am still thinking about FlexPiece which will have pieces that can be plopped down instead of drawn out.
This will only be used on some complicated setups. This is so the process for NAM 37 can speed up.
-eggman121
Amazing work :thumbsup:
Amazing work indeed.
Only one item of question. Why does the color of the rail keep changing? It is hard to to keep up with difference maps or it could just be my own ignorance.
Nice work &apls. Always great to see RRW options growimg :popcorn:
Very nice! We can expect lots of different options :thumbsup:
Awesome progress developments,
Tracks ahead!!
train watching
:popcorn:
Bravo! &apls
Nick
Here are some new pieces from the factory ;D
(https://i.imgur.com/QTCqONm.jpg)
Skinned (AKA RRW Reskin) Many thanks to Badsim for the base textures $%Grinno$% They are also pathed Still need LHDs however.
(https://i.imgur.com/YC69MpT.jpg)
The STR will override from the STR end of the DTR <-> STR transitions.
The FlexPiece project is going very well so far :D
-eggman121
Way to go!!! &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Is that an asymmetrical STR? Looks really promising!! :bnn:
&apls &apls &apls
More fun for us with the new RRW pieces! :) It looks fantastic!
Many thanks!
- Tyberius
These are the best textures for the RRW. &apls &apls &apls
Still add 3D rails from Simmer... ::)
Great!
Very nice. :satisfied:
Thanks of all the comments and Likes everybody
I have just completed a Video for the Flex Piece Project.
https://www.youtube.com/v/17gBaGKNH8E&t=16s
Still very much in the works but you will get the idea ;)
-eggman121
It's amazing work! This will be lots of fun to use :) :bnn:
Awesome &apls &apls &apls
I'm rather giddy with excitement at this and the immense work you've put into the project. This for me is a perfect texture for RRW and suits my own needs in-game in terms of aesthetic. Can;t wait to roll this out across my region and cities!
&apls &apls
This will inspire me to do even more rail themed BAT's and lots for years to come :thumbsup:
.
(https://i.imgur.com/lw9han4.gif)
Nick
:popcorn:
... It's already over?
This resolves so much on learning to use all the flex novelties!! I'm sure many people will decide to embrace the RRW with this and the customisable textures
Wow... well I haven't played since january/february with the game, but still remember the patterns of RRW turnouts, at least most of them :) But these new flex pieces will be as much fun, as the patterns. In some cases they will be essentials... No more puzzle pieces, yeah-yeah-yeah... &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
- Tyberius
Outstanding work &apls Love all these new options and this project will revolutionize the usage and possibilities of STR. Wow :o
Thank you everyone for the nice commentary and Likes
I see I have a couple of new Youtube Followers now $%Grinno$%
Here is a taste of what I am working on at the moment...
(https://i.imgur.com/blFCyGn.jpg)
Hope you enjoy ;)
-eggman121
Excellent stuff! &apls
More from the factory! ;)
(https://i.imgur.com/mBEPcEu.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/x0njlxR.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/UCvMHPH.jpg)
I have to give a massive credit to Arne (Vester) for working on these models. Without his work these bridges would not have made it in.
The Models are originally Moonlights but have way to many verts and Vester took on the task of whittling down the complexity of these models.
Also there are L1 and L2 ERRW versions.
(https://i.imgur.com/tVyF196.jpg)
Again many thanks to Vester for making this possible. Hope you all enjoy!!!
-eggman121
Nice RRW bridges! &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dyoungyn summed it up very well! :popcorn:
Oh my.... &apls &apls &apls &apls
Thanks for everyone who commented and pressed like.
Here are some more Pieces from the factory...
(https://i.imgur.com/xJSgwzq.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/HBWdrhK.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/OCMRdFt.jpg)
The modeling was the hardest challenge with this piece. RULing was easy with 50 lines in the template.
Still a bit of texturing work to be done. This is just a proof of concept.
Off to be now.
-eggman121
Terrific! &apls &apls &apls
Very much I wait! :popcorn:
*the brain has planted*
:o
Nice to see my hard work is paying of.
You keep showing of your skills at modding. GREAT work.
Is that . . . what I think it is? :o :o
-Alex
Quote from: eggman121 on May 15, 2018, 10:55:57 PM
Here is a taste of what I am working on at the moment...
Hope you enjoy ;)
-eggman121
Damn, I take a few months off SC4 and THIS happens? this looks AMAZING, eggman!!
Stunning. :)
Bravo &apls
I'm probably halluconating, but that doesn't look 45-diag elevated stuff. I looks FAR. But can that be possible? Oh dear.... &apls &apls &apls
That is one of the most stimulating sc4 custom content I've seen recently ::) Congrats &apls &apls &apls
Thanks for all the positive comments and Likes $%Grinno$% and thank you Arthur for the Rep :thumbsup:
(https://i.imgur.com/onRvBOB.jpg)
Um.... ()stsfd()
-eggman121
Ok, this directly enters the 'completely bonkers' category!!! &hlp &hlp &hlp
This should be #1 trending on the Internet today :)
Quote from: eggman121 on May 31, 2018, 03:04:00 AM
...
Um.... ()stsfd()
...
"Um ()stsfd()" indeed
Well said, sir
:bnn:
Wow....(Censored) unbelievable. :o
Brilliant stuff! You are spoiling us ;D
Thanks again for all the comments and likes. ;)
I think I have been going over a beyond...
(https://i.imgur.com/bWrUyJ3.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/cEj3TXQ.jpg)
Not as big as this Bad boy (https://www.google.com/maps/place/59273+Fretin,+France/@50.570822,3.1414746,2064m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c2d6d479796861:0x631c82785d2a8af2!8m2!3d50.559364!4d3.135075) but I like the result anyhow.
This network will only be able to cross the RRW for now. Too much is involved in making a fully fleshed network for Elevated STR. This will allow the basis for future functionality and eventual E STR enhancements.
Thanks for all the comments and support thus far $%Grinno$%
A great big thankyou to Vester for his work on the E STR Models ;)
-eggman121
Hmm.... ()stsfd() I like it! :thumbsup: &apls &apls &apls
ahh... eggman. Now you're talking! &apls
By the way. I just wondered, wether there is a simple spreadsheet or something like it, where you can see which network crossings are supported, and which are not. Playing with the ERRW, I frequently run into situations, which appareantly aren't covered (like diag ERRW x ortho RHW), but sometimes also find out about supported setups by chance.
OMG!
Quote from: Seaman on June 10, 2018, 11:53:29 PM
By the way. I just wondered, wether there is a simple spreadsheet or something like it, where you can see which network crossings are supported, and which are not. Playing with the ERRW, I frequently run into situations, which appareantly aren't covered (like diag ERRW x ortho RHW), but sometimes also find out about supported setups by chance.
The new documentation does include sections in some of the feature guides called "Network Capabilities" or "Network and FLEX Piece Capabilities", which are a form of what you've described, complete with color coding. The RRW feature guide doesn't have a section like this, but the RHW (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/feature-guides/realhighway/realhighway.html#capabilities), NWM (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/feature-guides/network-widening-mod/network-widening-mod.html#capabilities), SAM (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/feature-guides/street-addon-mod/street-addon-mod.html#capabilities), and (believe it or not) HSRP (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/feature-guides/high-speed-rail/high-speed-rail.html#capabilities) guides do.
In the case of the RHW, as noted on the Network Capabilities table, the support for viaduct crossings is limited to OxO only as of NAM 36.
-Alex
-Alex
Thanks for the reply's so far everyone. :thumbsup:
Now...
Quote from: Seaman on June 10, 2018, 11:53:29 PM
ahh... eggman. Now you're talking! &apls
By the way. I just wondered, wether there is a simple spreadsheet or something like it, where you can see which network crossings are supported, and which are not. Playing with the ERRW, I frequently run into situations, which appareantly aren't covered (like diag ERRW x ortho RHW), but sometimes also find out about supported setups by chance.
Thanks for the nice comment and question.
I think a table of crossing that are available should be made.. %%Order?/
I think that will be tomorrows work ;)
In general this is the sequence...
L1 ERRW
Ortho x
Ortho only apart from
Diagonal x
Diagonal RRW crossings
L2 ERRW
Ortho x
Ortho for all networks
(Maxis, RHW, NWM and FTLs)...
Ortho x Diagonal, Diagonal x Orthogonal and Diagonal X Diagonal are exclusive to the
Maxis Networks only! I did this to emulate the viaduct pieces that existed in the Rail Viaduct system.
I will make a table and hopefully get it added into the Documentation in the short term.
Hopefully the information above is of use.
Edit: Thanks
Tarkus :)
-eggman121
Wow, this is getting to be more and more like RHW, only with rail. Great job!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thank you Tarkus and eggman for the quick response.
In fact, I had the tables of the RHW documentation in mind when I thought about the RRW. Now, looking at them again (although being a fan of pdfs, I can't argue with the usefulness of a (online-)HTML documentation!) they are way more detailed, then I remember. On the other hand, they might be much slimmer for RRW since you basically have only two different networks for each level (single track/dual track) and no flexfly capabilities (yet? ;)).
Anyway, thanks for the clarification, eggman!
This is absolutely great $%Grinno$% &apls It's just like this kind of nightmarish whirring pile of iron spaghetti (near where I spent most of my teens : https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7389812,4.848816,375m/data=!3m1!1e3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7389812,4.848816,375m/data=!3m1!1e3)) are no more as much illusory as they used to be in game :satisfied:
Well-well, more RRW fun. Now with more STR support... &apls &apls &apls &apls
My heart is not that strong Stephen! :)
Thanks for your work! :)
- Tyberius
Stephen, you raised the bar so far up that I now need one of my freshly released telescopes to see it.... &apls
Nick
Holy moly, that looks awesome! &apls
Iron spaghetti indeed :D
Thanks everyone for the further comments and Likes :thumbsup:
@Seaman Remember your Post.. (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15931.msg510967#msg510967) Especially this Link? (https://www.google.de/maps/@52.5949571,11.9393997,1759m/data=!3m1!1e3)
Well...
(https://i.imgur.com/ckUeOwI.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/HjXc1gh.jpg)
;D
Regarding the documentation about the ERRW crossings.
I have made a HTML sheet with all the available crossings thus far that are available (NAM 36).
Once we have reviewed it and edited it up to standard it will go in the NAM Doc section.
Thanks again...
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on June 11, 2018, 09:50:03 PM
@Seaman Remember your Post.. (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15931.msg510967#msg510967) Especially this Link? (https://www.google.de/maps/@52.5949571,11.9393997,1759m/data=!3m1!1e3)
eggman, I consider this "misson accomplished"! Just look at it... so smooth :o
So beautiful, such elegant verve, such lordly smoothness ...
man, you paint railway tracks like Amedeo Modigliani used to paint female bodies.
These curves so sweet ... And this f****** viaduct one way, it's amazing! &hlp
Sorry.
Every part of this is SO beautiful!!! :crytissue:
Quote from: 000 on June 12, 2018, 01:15:03 PM
And this f****** viaduct one way
What's wrong about a
fantastic viaduct one way? :D
Wow! Love how you placed your single track.
Great development!
@eggman: Hahaha... this is what I meant. I really love playing with the RRW. I mean, I still look frequently into the manual to get some ideas (or the precise pattern for the different FAR), but today I once again "discovered" something for the first time! Despite beeing a logical version of the lower one (by extending the branching part through), I haven't had a clue it was in the game. But this made the surpise better and I enjoyed the feeling of finding an easteregg (I know it isn't one, but please let me feel that way ;))
(https://i.imgur.com/mV8d951.jpg)
Seaman!
Congratulations. You found the A2 Extended Dual.
There is a nifty addition I am making for that piece.
You will see it in NAM 37 if you are adventurous enough.
I consider it an easter (Or summer solstice) egg where you are. Currently winter here in Australia.
Enjoy ;)
-eggman121
They actually sell colorful "Soccer eggs" in the stores here now, talk about commercializing the world... I fear the next NAM will be more of a "Christmas egg", considering the amount of work that needs to be done for all those lovely new things, but it's more than worth the wait. :)
Those are cool parts of the FAR thing.
I tried them for a while, like them, and got a bit frustrated trying to link them the MAXIS RR.
I like to get my hands on the manual that Seaman mentioned.
BTW, something doesn't fit here: The spread of the tracks seems a little wide to me. &Thk/(
The spread of the tracks are intentional due the geometry. It is really a condensed version of a ladder turnout. Unfortunately in both RL and SC4 the tracks have to align perfectly even if a bit more space is taken.
-eggman121
(https://i.imgur.com/jHsH4nc.jpg)
Nick
eggman121: After posting my remark, I came with the same strange wide spread of the gauge, so it seems like it's a common a thing.
BTW, Have you peeked the "feature-guide\realrailway" in the NAM auxiliary Files? Has anybody used it? It's a gold mine! But I can't reproduce anything... :(
This is simply mindblowing, what you are doing with the tracks! Thanks for all this outstanding work! &apls &apls &apls
@huzman:
There is already a pretty good documentation for the RRW. You can find it in the NAM documentation folder on your computer, and thanks to the new online documentation also here (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/feature-guides/realrailway/realrailway.html).
You will find there all the drag patterns you need, with lots of pictures and descriptions. I don't know exactly what eggman is working on, but I assume it will be more something like an update of the documentary and maybe a new table or two to have a more condensed overview of the RRW. Basically all patterns are already in the documentation.
My example I mentioned above may not be explicitly mentioned there, but it fits to a certain logic behind the patterns, which you'll get from the documentation.
Hi huzman, carlfatal and Seaman.
I will answer a few questions.
For NAM 37 I am working on a flexpiece version of the Flextrack pieces. That will mean that the pieces can be plopped down like the flexramps for the RHW.
I am also working on some other content but for the RRW in this release but this will be the centrepiece.
I did do some ERRW documentation regarding crossings. Really the best remedy is to make things easier to use.
-eggman121
eggman121: Thanks for the explanations, but as i am trying to move up from the plain vanilla, I don't know yet what pieces fit where.
Seaman: Yes, Thanks. I found many docs, including the "features" on I quoted and thanks again for the link for the on line help.
EDIT: Oh yeah... I did find that one; it has me baffled! I don't know how or WHAT pieces to place. I can't find that little track which is about half a tile big. Out of a good 25 tries, I got one or two right. And to boot, Most of the "Auxiliary Files" and the links of the "Feature Guide" are dead.
Most frustrating, to be polite.
Hello Everyone.
Most people like a Sequel :D
https://www.youtube.com/v/g4fQmlsczvg
@huzman
Sorry to hear you are having issues still with the placement of Pieces. I am working hard to fix that issue. The Documentation for the RRW can be found Here (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/feature-guides/realrailway/realrailway.html) for the RRW section if that is help for the moment.
I hope to get this content out in the not too distant future. Hopefully there will be some comments on the new "Slope" adjustments I have been doing?
Enjoy ()flower()
-eggman121
Great stuff,cant wait for the release,thanks you guys for all your hard work on all these interesting and usable content you are all creating. :) :)
Wow!
The new tunnel is gorgeous! And the new flex pieces will be quite useful too! One of the things what I love in RRW how slope tolerant it is.
Thanks for the video, and to making these new stuffs!
- Tyberius
eggman121: One quick and fast comment: That. Is. A. Great. Tutorial.
Thanks.
Really nice tutorial. I have booked marked this thread for easier reference. Thanks a ton for doing this.
Long time... No post ::)
Here is what I have just completed...
(https://i.imgur.com/OjQJYzZ.jpg)
Various Size Curves
(https://i.imgur.com/rR6o9Tl.jpg)
Or a Large radius Curve!
(https://i.imgur.com/0NXcBfx.jpg)
Why not cross the curve with some road :D
This is all based on the FlexPiece project that encompasses the FlexFARR stuff.
Only 3 new pieces have been added. These include FARR 6 for the first time. Only possible with Flex technology.
Only the FARR turnouts to do than I have completed the Flexpiece project for the RRW for NAM #37
-eggman121
The curves and FARR do not contain Catenaries? &ops
Nice one...I love the work you're doing on the rails :thumbsup:
Quote from: Alan_Waters on September 20, 2018, 01:54:24 PM
The curves and FARR do not contain Catenaries? &ops
The catenary project is still unfinished and will probably not make it into NAM 37. It will, of course, include catenaries on curves, FARR, probably everything. Stephen can tell you more about that.
...crossings on curves... :bnn:
Nice going Stephen &apls
Nick
Quote from: Simmer2 on September 20, 2018, 09:36:17 PM
...crossings on curves... :bnn:
wait a second, it's really hard to tell because of the smoothiness of the curve, but I thought the crossings are actually at straight FARR sections, connected by FARR curves? So the new feature would be the crossings on straight FARR pieces in various angles ()what()
Seaman you are correct.
The Level crossings are on the straight sections. The wide radius nature gives the impression that the road is on a curve but is actually not the case.
There have been thoughts and even prototype showing exhibit R3 crossing RD4 made by Swordmaster (Willy) Founder of the RRW project.
(https://i.imgur.com/bCMCfO1.png)
I have limited the amount of new content for NAM 37 with bugfixes and Flexpiece instead.
So post NAM 37 I think delving into these sorts of crossing discussions may be fruitful in the evolution of the RRW.
-eggman121
Oh, more fun for RRW, thanks Stephen, this will be really nice!
- Tyberius
Way to go!!! &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
But ... this ... is amazing!
(https://media.makeameme.org/created/zlatan-is-impressed-56ps93.jpg)
Thanks everyone for the comments :thumbsup:
I am going about a refit of the code and IIDs and am yielding some good results.
May take some time and depending on scheduling may not be available until Post NAM 37. It will be worth the wait however.
I am looking to make the RRW more efficient in terms of coding and IID allocation.
In the meantime...
(https://i.imgur.com/EzFdYhZ.jpg)
And yes the standard pieces will work in tandem.
(https://i.imgur.com/FW3ZcVJ.jpg)
The refit will make it easier to add things like signals and much anticipated catenaries. Getting a consistent allocation of IIDs is the first step.
-eggman121
useful piece esp given the inclination to jump tracks on the diagonal X at times.
Awesome work man! I didn't even realize those kind of switches were common until fairly recently when I made a point of studying railroad switches--Willy would doubtlessly be shaking his head in disbelief :D
Awesome as it is though, it seems too sharp an angle most situations. I imagine distinguishing between the two but something more along the lines of the STR link between parallel rails that currently exists at an FA2 angle. Perhaps these slip switches could be implemented at FA3 or at FA2, probably forcing the STR FA switch to move to FA3? I'll be happy with anything of course; this is a really exciting development :bnn:
Thanks Noah
Slip switches for wider geometry already exist (http://sc4devotion.com/namdoc/feature-guides/realrailway/realrailway.html) in flextrack for NAM 36 using the appropriate patterns.
Willy would have mixed opinions but keeping options open for end use is the way I am doing thing at the moment.
Kinda silly how the trains jump paths and quite annoying as well. I have some plans to mitigate it however $%#Ninj2
-eggman121
:sleeping: ....... %%Order?/
Well I suppose I have your attention now.
I have been going upon a reorganization pattern for the RRW that will incorporate new functionality into the RealRailway Project. I have some of the fundamentals in place and I would like to share an update.
Here is what this edition brings....
(https://i.imgur.com/Rs4YNuK.jpg)
(Macrocurves)
These curves have the same footprint as the minicurves but are more realistic in geometry...
(https://i.imgur.com/AZMeRpF.jpg)
(Comparison to minicurves)
They are based on flex pieces that will be customizable to a variety of turnouts as shown below...
(https://i.imgur.com/7LF7ttT.jpg)
(Yard with macrocurves)
Finally I will showcase the trainset...
(https://i.imgur.com/4GbLoMM.jpg)
(Trainset with the R type macrocurves)
So there you go.
To compliment I am going to make the whole thing really customisable in the way of detail.
That is that If you want Catenary poles as a BAT all you have to do is match the IID to IID read by the T21, Bit of Geek Speak here &smrt
This is such an awesome project and I have been hanging out to show you the stuff that is coming.
RL has hit real hard on the NAM team last and this year. I would not anticipate all of the functionality at once but I will use what time I have to get this mod up and running smoothly.
-eggman121
Eggman :),
I really love the new Macro curves and this has indeed added a lot to the overall functionality of the RRW
Thanks so much for all your efforts here :thumbsup:
Thanks to you most realistic part of SC4 is rail traffic.
At this point I'd like to post a picture of the legendary 360 degree viaduct in Brusio (Swizzerland) of the Bernina-Rail, a UNESCO world cultural heritage and one of the most beautiful railroads of the world.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/RhB_ABe_4-4_III_Kreisviadukt_Brusio.jpg/1200px-RhB_ABe_4-4_III_Kreisviadukt_Brusio.jpg)
You're getting close creating a UNESCO cultural heritage too, my friend!
&apls &apls &apls &apls
Wow, that looks fantastic &apls &apls Great work!!!
(https://imageshack.com/a/img924/1928/yMHx4w.png)
That's K-point worthy if anything ever was.
David
Even more improvement!? On the same footprint!! This is unbelievable, you should have to be hacking reality to make all of this possible!
QuoteTo compliment I am going to make the whole thing really customisable in the way of detail.
That is that If you want Catenary poles as a BAT all you have to do is match the IID to IID read by the T21, Bit of Geek Speak here &smrt
love that :D :D
Thanks for the awesome work on that project :thumbsup:
This sure has taken a serious good turn for teh better... as this now makes this a viable "game" to model railroading... with the updates of NAM RRW and [%confuso okay forgot the guys name] will really do this game good... :thumbsup:
a real thanks to eggman the rest of teh RRW team and teh NAM team... &apls
I hope that the latest version of NAM will soo n arrive like a Easter surprise...
That is great!
Well done Stephen!! Can't wait!
(https://i.imgur.com/lw9han4.gif)
Simmer2
You did an awesome and wonderful job. When the RRW is fully completed with the catenaries, the railways will appear more realistic than ever. The railways have long been left behind at the expense of the road networks, and thanks to you, the players will be happy to be able to build rails. Thank you for your work! :popcorn:
Thanks for all the replys and likes :thumbsup:
I have made a short video about the NAM Macrocurve workings...
https://www.youtube.com/v/ep5n3mLfLpM&feature=youtu.be
Just some of the content I have been working on $%#Ninj2
Hope you all enjoy.
-eggman121
Woooott &apls
What a dream come true!
Simmer2
Grand !!! &apls &apls &apls
Awesome stuff!
Pretty awesome and cool stuff, Stephen! &apls &apls &apls
I can't wait to play with these RRW goodiness! :)
- Tyberius
Best RRW curves ever! :thumbsup: I will waiting! &apls &apls &apls :bnn:
Rail finally too will obey Mayor Fantozzi's will?
Hehehe. ()flamdev() Hehehe. ()flamdev() Hehehe ()flamdev() Hehehe. ()flamdev() Hehehe.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/FrajBDPikVqBG/giphy.gif)
Here is a nice big circle for the RRW....
(https://i.imgur.com/G9dJn4Y.jpg)
This will be the biggest curve you will be able to make with the RRW.
I will take any guesses for what this was made of? (e.g It is not the MRC paradigm!)
Guesses?
.?
..?
...?
....?
.....?
......?
.......?
........?
.........?
This image should put things into perspective ;)
(https://i.imgur.com/LQil86W.jpg)
&nj
-eggman121
Nice. :satisfied:
Don't really got any clue as to how it was made tho.
Quote from: art128 on September 03, 2019, 09:25:40 AM
Nice. :satisfied:
Don't really got any clue as to how it was made tho.
It was made Carefully ;D
So wide :thumbsup: I'm still impressed with all of the RRW when I think about it &apls &apls
Looks amazing :thumbsup:
Quote from: eggman121 on September 03, 2019, 03:30:31 AM
Here is a nice big circle for the RRW....
I will take any guesses for what this was made of?
Quote from: Kitsune on September 03, 2019, 09:28:49 AM
Quote from: art128 on September 03, 2019, 09:25:40 AM
Nice. :satisfied:
Don't really got any clue as to how it was made tho.
It was made Carefully ;D
Was it made with love?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBREKUM8yNg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBREKUM8yNg)
(with apologies to an Australian TV ad)
Yes its amazing how far , all this has gone / progressed since the ole Maxis rail :)
it is headed into content areas , i never thought possible..
Remarkable curves &apls
That's FAR wider than I had hoped to be possible in game!
Roundabout version of RRW! Nice! :D :thumbsup: &apls
hey @eggman121, any tips on how to use the FARR-6 in the NAM 37 RC? it looks super cool and useful, but i can't work out how to drag it out!
Quote from: tomvsotis on June 01, 2020, 02:43:00 AM
hey @eggman121, any tips on how to use the FARR-6 in the NAM 37 RC? it looks super cool and useful, but i can't work out how to drag it out!
OK, i worked that one out. Hurrah!
A couple more, though: I'm not sure if it's bc i have a borked installation or something, but none of the draggable FARR RRW patterns from NAM 36 seem to work? e.g. dragging parallel four-tile-long pieces of rail, overlapping by two tiles, doesn't seem to override into FARR any more?
And also, how do we do FARR turnouts in NAM 37? there don't seem to be any FLEX pieces for them, and i can't get those draggable patterns to work, either. (and tbh it was always kinda difficult, even under NAM 36.)
any thoughts/advice much appreciated! what you've done w the RRW is AMAZING <3
Hi!
Quote from: tomvsotis on June 01, 2020, 03:06:03 AM
but none of the draggable FARR RRW patterns from NAM 36 seem to work? e.g. dragging parallel four-tile-long pieces of rail, overlapping by two tiles, doesn't seem to override into FARR any more?
Indeed, this default pattern is no longer available with NAM 37. There is a new pattern, but it starts from an Ortho-FARR curve.
It's something like this with the FARR-3:
(https://i.imgur.com/u8ug87I.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/5tbtcGt.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/EbHFFUG.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/HX6DumL.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/6st6PGN.jpg)
FARR-2 is something like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/bxvTz3q.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/dCZrW0w.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/bykoy4R.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/E9zOIho.jpg)
I found a kind of drag pattern for the FARR 1.5/1.33, but I'm not sure about it, but it's more messy. I would recommend you to use the FLEX-FARR items.
QuoteAnd also, how do we do FARR turnouts in NAM 37? there don't seem to be any FLEX pieces for them, and i can't get those draggable patterns to work, either. (and tbh it was always kinda difficult, even under NAM 36.)
At this moment I don't think if there are FLEX turnouts, but I managed to make it work most of the draggable patterns, but one. The
Orthogonal DTR C2 branching off FARR 3 Turnout doesn't seem to have its pattern to be working. But the rest is working mostly, but some of them require extra care, like the FARR-2 G2 turnout. This one tends to transform to a regular/irregular turnout if you don't do it in the right way. I would say, it's working after a bunch of trial and error.
I hope it helps!
- Tyberius
Quote from: tomvsotis on June 01, 2020, 03:06:03 AM
Quote from: tomvsotis on June 01, 2020, 02:43:00 AM
hey @eggman121, any tips on how to use the FARR-6 in the NAM 37 RC? it looks super cool and useful, but i can't work out how to drag it out!
OK, i worked that one out. Hurrah!
A couple more, though: I'm not sure if it's bc i have a borked installation or something, but none of the draggable FARR RRW patterns from NAM 36 seem to work? e.g. dragging parallel four-tile-long pieces of rail, overlapping by two tiles, doesn't seem to override into FARR any more?
And also, how do we do FARR turnouts in NAM 37? there don't seem to be any FLEX pieces for them, and i can't get those draggable patterns to work, either. (and tbh it was always kinda difficult, even under NAM 36.)
any thoughts/advice much appreciated! what you've done w the RRW is AMAZING <3
Thanks for the kind reply :)
Yes I have shifted the INRULs from the straights so dual setups are now possible. So the only way to obtain the FARR pieces are to use the patterns for the Curve pieces or easier still is to use the FLEX pieces in the TAB ring.
@Tibi Which switch where you referring too? I kept the patterns intact so there should not be an issue with the C2 FARR turnout.
On other matters now.
Just working on the reskin before any large movement...
(https://i.imgur.com/LmGmzyQ.jpg)
(Setup with various pieces)
(https://i.imgur.com/nZEG5vx.jpg)
(Flying Junction)
The hope is to have a couple of Reskins that are pre compiled for NAM 37 upon proper release. Other items may follow.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on June 13, 2020, 11:12:27 AM
@Tibi Which switch where you referring too? I kept the patterns intact so there should not be an issue with the C2 FARR turnout.
On other matters now.
Just working on the reskin before any large movement...
(https://i.imgur.com/LmGmzyQ.jpg)
(Setup with various pieces)
(https://i.imgur.com/nZEG5vx.jpg)
(Flying Junction)
The hope is to have a couple of Reskins that are pre compiled for NAM 37 upon proper release. Other items may follow.
-eggman121
Hi Stephen!
Oh, my bad. I gave it an other try and now I managed to draw that
Orthogonal DTR C2 branching off FARR 3 Turnout, but the pattern is slightly differnet from the one in the old documentation.
In game:
(https://i.imgur.com/u1Lh5GN.jpg)
Actual pattern:
(https://i.imgur.com/QusjLGH.jpg)
So it's working, but sometimes need a little trickery in which order you draw the different rail tracks to get the proper results.
Reskin looks pretty good, Stephen! I can't wait to have it! :)
Keep up the good work!
- Tyberius
Apologies for posing a question which is slightly off the current topic. I've only transitioned to RRW for my new city tile and there's a quite noticeable lag when laying the track or placing roads/streets close to the RRW tracks.
Is this normal? I'm using the RRW reskin as well.
Quote from: belfastsocrates on June 14, 2020, 05:40:21 AM
Apologies for posing a question which is slightly off the current topic. I've only transitioned to RRW for my new city tile and there's a quite noticeable lag when laying the track or placing roads/streets close to the RRW tracks.
Is this normal? I'm using the RRW reskin as well.
How do you mean this: "
when laying the track or placing roads/streets close to the RRW tracks."? (image?)
It's definitelly not normal, but I haven't experienced anything like this.
- Tyberius
In the past I've had this issue when laying down transit. Turns out If I play LHD (which I assume you do) and you lay transit that are missing LHD paths files the game will indeed lag a lot. Make sure you've got the LHD paths files in your NAM folders.
Quote from: belfastsocrates on June 14, 2020, 05:40:21 AM
Apologies for posing a question which is slightly off the current topic. I've only transitioned to RRW for my new city tile and there's a quite noticeable lag when laying the track or placing roads/streets close to the RRW tracks.
Is this normal? I'm using the RRW reskin as well.
Paths are probably the issue here if you are using LHD.
If you have the drawpaths cheat could you please show me which pieces are affected?
This would be handy to get the LHD situation sorted out before the proper release.
-eggman121
Thanks for the advice. Seems there are no paths on the dragged elements of the RRW. Did I install NAM incorrectly?
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/2474/zXIxg4.png)
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/5412/xNXmTl.png)
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img924/5242/Np0s4z.png)
QuoteThanks for the advice. Seems there are no paths on the dragged elements of the RRW. Did I install NAM incorrectly?
Hi
@belfastsocrates.
I would check it you still have the Z_NAM folder still in your Plugins? If so, Please back it up.
The straights should definitely have paths.
The installer structure has changed so this is all that should be in the "Network Addon Mod" Folder
(https://i.imgur.com/LRPDVFQ.jpg)
If in doubt, Just remove the whole
Network Addon Mod and
Z_NAM folders (Back them up somewhere safe!) and Reinstall Make sure LHD is checked.
-eggman121
Yeah I have the Z_Nam folder. I'll backup and delete it and then load to see. I'll check my NAM structure as well once I'm back at the laptop.
Quote from: belfastsocrates on June 15, 2020, 02:49:25 PM
Yeah I have the Z_Nam folder. I'll backup and delete it and then load to see. I'll check my NAM structure as well once I'm back at the laptop.
I should have probably asked... Are you using NAM 36 or NAM 37?
If NAM 36 than you should backup the Network Addon Mod folder and Z_NAM Folder and fresh install.
If you have tried NAM 37, You will need to remove previous version of the NAM in your folder.
The fact that the Ortho and Diag pieces are different in terms of colour points to the Paths and/or exemplars not being in place.
I did a ton of work on LHD paths for NAM 37 and have been kinda hoping for an LHD user to use NAM 37 so if pieces break in LHD I can fix them for the proper release.
As for the Reskin... I have updated it to NAM 37 standards along with some help.
I probably need to make some documentation for the new pieces.
-eggman121
Quote from: eggman121 on June 15, 2020, 06:35:26 PM
Quote from: belfastsocrates on June 15, 2020, 02:49:25 PM
Yeah I have the Z_Nam folder. I'll backup and delete it and then load to see. I'll check my NAM structure as well once I'm back at the laptop.
I should have probably asked... Are you using NAM 36 or NAM 37?
-eggman121
36 at the minute. I can download the 37 release though and give it a go if you want to have a look at anything relating to RRW and LHD? Just let me know.
I can load a new city tile and use that to play with rail options, just let me know.
Quote from: belfastsocrates on June 16, 2020, 09:11:13 AM
36 at the minute. I can download the 37 release though and give it a go if you want to have a look at anything relating to RRW and LHD? Just let me know.
I can load a new city tile and use that to play with rail options, just let me know.
If you can use NAM 37 and help me fix up some of the missing areas in LHD that would be greatly appreciated :)
I have fixed a bit of the LHD issues however I feel there is still more. NAM 37 proper release should not be too far off. We just want to get the settings right for the full release.
-eggman121
Wondering if the rules used here, will be beneficial in creating draggable FARHW or FAAVE or FANWM.
Is there any future plan for Elevated rail over RHW. The only thing we have now, is OXO.
Help,
Can anyone tell me how to get back the long slop with the Rail like it was with NAM 38 and beyond? I love this long slop as it looks flat but no flat very gradual decline?
dyoungyn
Quote from: dyoungyn on May 11, 2021, 08:51:14 AM
Help,
Can anyone tell me how to get back the long slop with the Rail like it was with NAM 38 and beyond? I love this long slop as it looks flat but no flat very gradual decline?
dyoungyn
Depends:
- If you didn't use any slope mods, then what you might be thinking is about the RRW tunnel and slope mod included in the NAM, make sure it's selected when installing the mod.
- Conversely f you are using a slope mod of your own, with relatively flat rail slopes, then it may be possible that the RRW tunnel and slope mod may be too steep for what you want, in which case you can either remove it from your installation (the file is found in its own folder, under 2 Additional Network Features), or de-select it when doing a new installation.
So after some 4 or 5 years, I recently got back into SC4 after the release of NAM42 and the whole transition from puzzle pieces to flex has me a little confused. Endless lockdown here in Australia has also contributed.
I'm seeing all these incredible videos of RRW / HRW (specifically in Eggman's tech demo videos) with awesome bed textures and concrete sleepers, all draggable from various flex pieces using the normal DTR railway, and figured they'd be a fantastic replacement for my somewhat dated pylons-with-no-wires mod on top of HD-ified Maxis textures in the metro areas. The standard NAM RRW textures with no overheads are perfect for rural and semi-rural stuff. Unfortunately in making the update to NAM42, my draggable railways no longer have pylons / catenaries. But even with the HRW flex pieces, I can only seem to drag the now-standard brown DTR with no wires out from the concrete-sleeper HRW flex pieces.
Eggman, I notice in videos of yours from 2018 and 2019 (and even images back in 2013, when you first displayed the overhead wires concept!!) that your draggable rail has incredibly realistic textures, way better than the standard HRW textures and far more metro-appropriate that RRW, but as per the RRW thread intro, different textures have never been planned for this part of the NAM.
The closest I can figure is the HRW, and even then I can't seem to make it happen without manually going along, removing the original track and plopping down the flex piece, which largely defeats the purpose of the flex pieces replacing puzzle pieces! Even plopping the HRW pieces OVER the standard track doesn't replace them with the concrete sleepers and overhead wires. I can't find any videos on the subject, most of the NAM content on YouTube focuses on RHW.
Is it a case of the textures and draggable catenaries stuff shown in your in-game videos hasn't made it into the NAM as of #42, or is it stricly in ploppable format for now... or have I got something very basic, completely wrong?? I've checked the usual suspects including removing the z___NAM folder and the associated catenary mod files and folders... the HRW documentation is also yet to be written and I imagine writing that would be almost as big a project as the HRW/RRW itself!
at this stage, my options are to return to the old, old Maxis rail textures with catenaries but no wires and limited functionality for metro areas, or have the brown rail in cities with no catenaires as I can't get my head around this HRW, and the current grey skin is too dark and low contrast to stand out from my landscape textures. I can't even get STR happening! I feel like there's been this incredible development in the railways of SC4 as part of the NAM and yet I'm somehow stuck with fewer realism options than I had 5 years ago.
Eggman, what is happening in your videos, in this very thread I believe, from 2 - 3 years ago that I'm missing here in 2021? Apologies in advance if it's a really stupid question, the only 3 HRW buttons in my rail menu are straights, curves and switches and even they have only a few flex pieces each, with no STR. It's not even the combined monorail/rail functionality that I'm missing so much as the realistic look of the railways, sleepers and bed (and, yes, catenaries in the city) in your videos that would fit beautifully in both a metro setting and suburban/semi-rural. Ultimately, I've got about 18 full-size city tiles stitched together in a 32gb photoshop file at zoom level 3, that I'd one day like to cover an entire wall of my house :)
Cheers!
Dicko
Hi Dicko,
Everything about HRW and it's development and a tutorial can be found in this dedicated thread:
https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=18867 (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=18867)
I created a tutorial when HRW was released, but it was just a "quick" image tutorial to show the currently available pieces and their use at the moment of release. HRW is planned to get some love in the next NAM releases whenever they happen.
Some basic thing about HRW and RRW because I see some confusion about them in your post.
1) RRW is a direct replacement and the default Rail road option since NAM v37. The old Maxis Rail and the RAM has been phased out, it will be released as a LEGACY content separately on LEX at one point and won't get any update in the future. Regarding the textures. In the past few years there was a planned RRW ReSkin project which will offer a few texture colour variation which can replace the currently default brownish one and also there will be a reskin kit released which will allow players to create their own reskin versions. Those RRW texture variations what you see in Eggman's videos and images are coming from the development of this reskin project.
You're right, RRW was planned to have overhead catenaries with wires, but during development and testings this idea was dismissed due to the amount of work what it required and some other complications. The draggable RRW likely will not have overhead catenaries with wires, but individual developers might be able to recreate the old or new catenaries (without wires) as T21 to work with the current version of the RRW. From NAM side as far as I know it is not planned currently. As of now according to the latest informations from Eggman, the RRW set-up will be offered as is, without catenaries mostly for rural set-ups, but it will have the RRW Reskin Mod, so the textures will be changeable (one at a time). Also RRW has STR option which has multiple draggable and FLEX curves and switches.
2) HRW is a completely different and separate network. It has the capability to carry passanger and freight traffic (RRW) and high-speed rail traffic (monorail) on the same tracks. At this moment there is no possible way to make it draggable hence that's the reason of the flex pieces. It was designed from the begining to have the catenaries and wires, but it won't get all the different switches curves angles as the RRW has, though it will get many of them. Currently I don't know if STR version of the HRW is planned at all. This is an inbetween network of the RRW and the R-HSR (yet to be developped).
There is a tutorial how to use HRW and what pieces it has currently on this link:
https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=18724.msg535486#msg535486 (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=18724.msg535486#msg535486)
Probably a more detailed tutorial will be made when the planned HRW update will happen.
Also there is already a HRW Reskin Kit available for the new network (a similiar one will be released for RRW in the near future). You can download it here:
https://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/34227-hybrid-railway-reskin-for-nam-39/ (https://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/34227-hybrid-railway-reskin-for-nam-39/)
I hope it helps a bit.
- Tyberius
Just to add to Tibi's comments, the switch from Rail to RRW is not a cosmetic one, although there is a cosmetic change at the heart of it. RRW is a totally new way of thinking about Rail and is now the only option we support, there is no going back. Technically the plan is to release the a special NAM Lite, without RRW and other features, but not only is this not yet a thing, but that also means you will never get all the RRW/HRW/R-HSR goodies, which trust me from reading your post, I'm confident you really want.
One change under the hood, is that Rail now uses a totally new ID scheme, T21s (that's the type of mod that adds those Catenaries), as based on said IDs. In other words, any mod not designed for RRW, will not have the RRW IDs and therefore few, if any, of the T21s will display. But that's not such a big deal, Rivit's RUM for RRW (https://community.simtropolis.com/files/file/29279-rum-for-rrw/) includes a set that is likely more comprehensive than any you'd have had for Maxis rail, even if it's not complete.
I would urge you and anyone else (because this comes up a lot), to try to give the new RRW textures a chance, they may not feel urban enough, but that's not really the case. Fact is, viewed from above, that is how all the rail lines look round these parts (Frankfurt, Germany), if you go on Google Maps or similar, you will see this is true in most places. Shiny rails are an illusion, based upon the angle upon which you look at them. Willy (RRW's creator and a Train Driver), wanted them to look realistic as he saw them. But they've taken a lot of harsh criticism because I suspect, most people simply dislike change.
As a direct result of these complaints, I worked with Eggman and Rivit to find a compromise, which is the RRW Reskin project (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15931.msg498203#msg498203). Anyone can download a repository of textures, use three custom textures to represent the Rail, Sleeper and Ballast colours they want, then using GoFSH create a custom variant automatically, no texture experience (or real work) required. Those who make custom sets are then free to upload them as cosmetic texture options, which anyone can use. I will note however, outside of the three project members and one other, no one has. This has been ready for years, it feels like it's been largely ignored and it took a lot of work to make it happen. Long and short, if you don't like the textures, change them, it's literally never been so easy.
You mention another oft-commented feature, like a SAM for Rail, being able to use more than one style of Rail Textures. This is very unlikely to ever happen, it's not as simple to do this for Rail as it was for SAM. Bearing in mind too, SAM is a very small subset of what Streets can do, it's just not practical.
So just as before, you are limited to one style of 'Heavy' Rail. What is new is the Hybrid Rail Project, a special type of rail that allows both Monorail and Rail to run along it. Right now monorail is L2 only and clunky, HSR is better but was never hugely developed. There are plans underway to create a Real High Speed Rail replacement, which will run both on the ground and elevated and when that happens, things will really kick off. So the idea is, you can have your fast long distance lines (R-HSR), dedicated local rail links (RRW) and in those places (urban areas typically) where they come together, they can use the hybrid system (HRW). At present the HRW is also supported by the RRW Reskin, I believe the same is planned for R-HSR too. In this sense, it will be possible to have inter-mingled rail, using one of three different (or identical) textures, each easily customisable if you want.
It is worth noting too, in SC4 due to the constraints of the game, Light Rail is completely separate from Rail and Monorail. However, Light Rail would more accurately fit the sort of urban commuter train systems, than heavy rail. NAM includes expanded El-Rail, which can connect to complex Tram (GLR) systems and use the subway network too. But Heavy Rail and Light Rail systems don't intermix well, except running separate lines and dedicated station types right now, I don't see plans to change this.
The specific catenaries that Eggman shows in some screenshots are unlikely to be added for RRW, simply because there are too many RRW pieces to cover and the workload is ridiculous for one person to do all that, whilst still developing the rail networks. But as ever, there is no technical reason stopping any of this being added by someone in future.
I hope the above helps to fill in some of the history which would otherwise take you about 20-30 pages of reading in this and other threads. I and most of the NAM team genuinely believe RRW is a far better future for rail and we've done all we can to make it as flexible as possible. But yes, you are going to have to say goodbye to the Maxis textures to come on-board. Otherwise, the only things you might loose are features that never existed until RRW came along having catenaries on them.
Quote from: dicko6 on September 21, 2021, 03:54:46 AM
So after some 4 or 5 years, I recently got back into SC4 after the release of NAM42 and the whole transition from puzzle pieces to flex has me a little confused. Endless lockdown here in Australia has also contributed.
I'm seeing all these incredible videos of RRW / HRW (specifically in Eggman's tech demo videos) with awesome bed textures and concrete sleepers, all draggable from various flex pieces using the normal DTR railway, and figured they'd be a fantastic replacement for my somewhat dated pylons-with-no-wires mod on top of HD-ified Maxis textures in the metro areas. The standard NAM RRW textures with no overheads are perfect for rural and semi-rural stuff. Unfortunately in making the update to NAM42, my draggable railways no longer have pylons / catenaries. But even with the HRW flex pieces, I can only seem to drag the now-standard brown DTR with no wires out from the concrete-sleeper HRW flex pieces.
Eggman, I notice in videos of yours from 2018 and 2019 (and even images back in 2013, when you first displayed the overhead wires concept!!) that your draggable rail has incredibly realistic textures, way better than the standard HRW textures and far more metro-appropriate that RRW, but as per the RRW thread intro, different textures have never been planned for this part of the NAM.
The closest I can figure is the HRW, and even then I can't seem to make it happen without manually going along, removing the original track and plopping down the flex piece, which largely defeats the purpose of the flex pieces replacing puzzle pieces! Even plopping the HRW pieces OVER the standard track doesn't replace them with the concrete sleepers and overhead wires. I can't find any videos on the subject, most of the NAM content on YouTube focuses on RHW.
Is it a case of the textures and draggable catenaries stuff shown in your in-game videos hasn't made it into the NAM as of #42, or is it stricly in ploppable format for now... or have I got something very basic, completely wrong?? I've checked the usual suspects including removing the z___NAM folder and the associated catenary mod files and folders... the HRW documentation is also yet to be written and I imagine writing that would be almost as big a project as the HRW/RRW itself!
at this stage, my options are to return to the old, old Maxis rail textures with catenaries but no wires and limited functionality for metro areas, or have the brown rail in cities with no catenaires as I can't get my head around this HRW, and the current grey skin is too dark and low contrast to stand out from my landscape textures. I can't even get STR happening! I feel like there's been this incredible development in the railways of SC4 as part of the NAM and yet I'm somehow stuck with fewer realism options than I had 5 years ago.
Eggman, what is happening in your videos, in this very thread I believe, from 2 - 3 years ago that I'm missing here in 2021? Apologies in advance if it's a really stupid question, the only 3 HRW buttons in my rail menu are straights, curves and switches and even they have only a few flex pieces each, with no STR. It's not even the combined monorail/rail functionality that I'm missing so much as the realistic look of the railways, sleepers and bed (and, yes, catenaries in the city) in your videos that would fit beautifully in both a metro setting and suburban/semi-rural. Ultimately, I've got about 18 full-size city tiles stitched together in a 32gb photoshop file at zoom level 3, that I'd one day like to cover an entire wall of my house :)
Cheers!
Dicko
The comments of Tibi and MGB have already explained to you the situation in the railway world of SC4. The only thing I recommend is to follow the thread on the development of HRW.
https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=18867.0
The only thing I can tell you is that there will be a tutorial on using HRW. But I still can't say the release date of this tutorial
Thanks for the detailed responses Tyberius, mgb and ulisse, it's really filled in a lot, and I do try to read through as much of these threads as I can to avoid asking things that have already been covered, so apologies if you're repeating things here.
I guess I tend to think of rail systems from a Melbourne perspective, where we have street-level trams in the inner-city, and a broad-gauge railway that's electrified to a certain point in the suburbs for commuter rail – and generally, but not always, has concrete sleepers on the same bed for these high-use areas – but then continues on in sets of 1, 2 or 3 tracks without catenaries for freight and regional rail, without the concrete sleepers, which the RRW texture emulates pretty much to perfection. Without the population densities of Europe (which also happens to apply to my SC4 region of about 3 million people) things like dedicated subways or high-speed interstate rail separate from standard railways have never been on the cards here.
It sounds like working on the rail code suffers from not having that "dirt road" network off which to base the RHW and that makes working on it a bit of a mission. But to be clear, I certainly don't have a problem with using the brown textures in an urban environment and the lack of "rail shine" (half a pixel or something silly like that) has never bothered me, tbh I never even notice it til reading about it on these forums!
But what has bothered me is that inability to have draggable commuter rail with overhead catenaries. I'm at the point now where I can swap in a plugins folder and get catenaries (you wouldn't really see the wires at the zoom I use) on all non-flex puzzle-piece curves (most of the city I built over the last 15 years, so there's a lot that doesn't use current-gen mods), leftover maxis rail textures and even the older, slightly-darker-brown RRW textures when I'm screen-shotting city/suburban cities, and simply remove it when doing regional / rural city tiles. They even appear on STR, but for whatever reason I haven't been able to get it happening on the newer NAM42 RRW textures so any time I drag over the older, browner textures or adjust the height of land nearby, the textures switch to the newer, lighter brown and the catenaries disappear. I'm downloading the RUM right now (am surprised it hasn't crossed my path before now given the sheer number of mods I've used over the years) and it looks essentially perfect for what I need, and easily removed for those rural areas, so mad thanks for that.
I had read about the texture replacement project some time ago, and while I have had a crack at making my own 3D objects and skins for freeway signs for use in-game before, I was never very successful, and the editing process described, with use of GoFSH and editing the actual files appeared pretty daunting for me... I figured I'd do more harm than good. But that amazing GIF with the cheese and bacon you linked to is exactly what I'm after in a rail mod, and you may have convinced me it's easy enough to try. Even if I can modify just the sleepers-part of the texture to concrete (see image of my local railway in south-eastern Melbourne outer suburbs, where electrification ends), that will be a huge success and more than I could've hoped for. I've downloaded that sample set attached to your post too, and will do the same if I can make it work... it still seems pretty intense when you talk about alpha channels and extracting and compiling DATs but I've got some time. Are the other few texture sets you mentioned in these forums? Haven't found anything re. RRW reskin on the LEX or STEX.
Thanks again for responding, it's immensely helpful in place of 1000 pages of instruction manual, and already I can see I won't be using the HRW for my particular look and feel, and that the RRW is most definitely the way of the future. I've been a member of these forums since 2008 and working on my own SC4 Sistene Chapel since '05 and never thought to just ask you guys a question. I can't believe how active the NAM team is on this after all these years!
Cheers!
dicko
*EDIT*
So it turns out using GoFSH to change the railway textures is significantly less daunting than it appears. After downloading RVT's RRW Retexture Kit (and a bunch of other stuff!) from their dropbox, I simply cropped/resized some google-search texture images in Photoshop to 24bit 128x128 *.bmp's, gave them the appropriate filenames, copy-pasted in the stock maxis textures to fill the gaps in my "Texture Set' folders and now have about 10 different RRW textures to use in various settings throughout my city! Haven't had the chance to test all of them out yet with the RUM catenaries but I reckon I'll actually end up ditching my dedicated airport HSR line and replacing it with viaducts of the more concrete/grey RRW textures, they're that versatile, so much better.
If I understand the process correctly, uploading my own texture sets is as simple as uploading a few tiny Bitmap images in a zip file, which can then be used with GoFSH and RVT's scripts - no understanding of "alpha channels" and the like necessary. It takes a while to compile, but this takes SC4 Railways up to and beyond the RHW in terms of customisability as far as I'm concerned - you guys are legendary and more people need to be talking about this.
Still getting the hang of GoFSH, but it looks like it can be used to import your own custom footpath and adjacent-grass textures too!
So having all these new rail textures to play with is amazing! But, when I went to replace my elevated HSR with draggable rail viaducts, I ran into an odd issue - as pictured - it seems the viaduct models aren't textued for some reason (see pic). This is the case for draggable 7.5m as well as 15m puzzle pieces. This wasn't the case before I compiled and changed the textures, so I'm thinking I've missed something, possibly related to GoFSH.
In addition, the catenaries added by the RUM are absent only on the elevated sections, although i think this might be more to do with the fact it's an old mod developed for an earlier version of the NAM.
Any thoughts?
SOLVED: The conflict is due to the presence of the RUM, I hadn't deleted all but one of the viaduct texture files so the game would load the final one in the set, which is clearly a demo texture. I managed to keep the catenaries and choose an appropriate viaduct style, leaving the new GoFSH RRW textures and properly skinned viaducts, but still can't get the catenaries happening on the elevated sections...
UPDATE: Using a combination of the RUM catenaries and plunderer's Catenary Mod v3, with folders renamed to load before the RRW Reskin, I've managed to get catenaries appearing on elevated L2 puzzle pieces... but not draggable ERRW. I also had to delete all but the viaducts and catenaries folders of the RUM in order to prevent the re-emergence of those horrid under-rail dirt blocks. That's as good as it's going to get for now, I've got some RRW textures to make!
Quote from: mgb204 on September 21, 2021, 02:55:49 PM
the plan is to release the a special NAM Lite, without RRW and other features...
I thought NAM Lite would only leave out RHW (highway) and its bulky RUL code. RRW replaced Maxis rail some time ago, so if there's no going back, then NAM-Lite would be DOA without it. Or am I misunderstanding something?
There's still no real settled agreement on what would constitute NAM Lite. I'd say there's a very high probability of some sort of "Simulator Only/Simulator+TSCT Only" package being offered, though likely not until the new version of the NAM Traffic Simulator being spearheaded by LucarioBoricua, known as "Simulator 448", is ready for public consumption. (Those curious about the new simulator's development can check out this thread (https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=18853.0).)
The inclusion of the "LowRAM/NoRHW" NAM Controller option in the main NAM installer, beginning with NAM 40, did pretty much curb the demand for a full-minus-RHW NAM package, so any NAM Lite package would likely lie somewhere in between "Simulator Only" and the full-blast NAM, probably closer to the former. We are still planning to release the mythical "Legacy Maxis Rail" plugin, though whether or not that's bundled in with any NAM Lite package instead of the RRW remains to be seen, and there's still the possibility NAM Lite would use RRW in some form, since we are committed to that specification.
-Alex
The tricky part with RealRailway is that, since it replaces the Maxis Rail specifications, all rail development occurring since the mid-NAM 30s has been exclusively for RRW. It doesn't matter much for standalone rail or rail / base network crossings (those already exist), but it matters more for crossings between rail and the networks modded in through the NAM since.
On the topic of a traffic simulator development, we've been intensively testing and iterating variations of the various parameters of this exemplar. We've made some important advances to figure out aspects which weren't well-understood, were misunderstood, or which weren't utilized to their full potential. It won't be ready for deployment as soon as I was initially anticipating, since we're making some profound changes and want to make sure they operate well in a large variety of situations. To be fair, while the thread cited by Tarkus does mention elements which are part of my in-development traffic simulator, it doesn't capture the full picture of the changes we'll be introducing, it's gonna feel rather different, and more intuitive.
Following on from mgb's suggestion, I have compiled a set of 16 different RRW textures using the GoFSH scripts - some just for fun, others for use. It's so versatile, and I had a lot of fun testing out various textures in-game!
Since you guys have gone to all the effort to make the necessary tools available to the public and not many seem to have used them, I'd like to make them available for anyone to download. I've set the archive up so that it's literally a drag-and-drop into the plugins folder. Each texture pack is about 25mb compressed and the whole kit is 387mb, (2x ~190mb rar files currently) which is nothing in terms of download time but might be a bit on the large side as far as servers go - I'm having a bit of trouble uploading them to the STEX on SimTropolis, keep running into errors even after splitting up the files, and there's a 2MB limit here on the forums.
Any suggestions on where to make these available for others, preferably even those who don't frequent these forums? Here's a scaled down preview pic:
UPDATE: Here's a download link to both parts, but it's a free service so I believe there's an expiry date.
https://we.tl/t-imzXR1brWH (https://we.tl/t-imzXR1brWH)
Quote from: dicko6 on September 25, 2021, 11:11:30 PM
Following on from mgb's suggestion, I have compiled a set of 16 different RRW textures using the GoFSH scripts - some just for fun, others for use. It's so versatile, and I had a lot of fun testing out various textures in-game!
Since you guys have gone to all the effort to make the necessary tools available to the public and not many seem to have used them, I'd like to make them available for anyone to download. I've set the archive up so that it's literally a drag-and-drop into the plugins folder. Each texture pack is about 25mb compressed and the whole kit is 387mb, (2x ~190mb rar files currently) which is nothing in terms of download time but might be a bit on the large side as far as servers go - I'm having a bit of trouble uploading them to the STEX on SimTropolis, keep running into errors even after splitting up the files, and there's a 2MB limit here on the forums.
Any suggestions on where to make these available for others, preferably even those who don't frequent these forums? Here's a scaled down preview pic:
UPDATE: Here's a download link to both parts, but it's a free service so I believe there's an expiry date.
https://we.tl/t-imzXR1brWH (https://we.tl/t-imzXR1brWH)
This is a magnificent job. Great job I just downloaded the file to view the content. One tip I can give you is to jump on the SC4D discord server if you want help and advice from the NAM Team
Continue the great job you're doing
Quote from: dicko6 on September 22, 2021, 07:27:00 AM
In addition, the catenaries added by the RUM are absent only on the elevated sections, although i think this might be more to do with the fact it's an old mod developed for an earlier version of the NAM...
UPDATE: Using a combination of the RUM catenaries and plunderer's Catenary Mod v3, with folders renamed to load before the RRW Reskin, I've managed to get catenaries appearing on elevated L2 puzzle pieces... but not draggable ERRW.
All the RRW's new draggable content uses a new ID scheme, whereas legacy features like the older puzzle-piece based viaducts, retain the original IDs. Hence why the older mod by Plunderer works for the legacy ones. Now assuming the default rotation of the models was not changed, not something I can guarantee, it would be possible to make a copy of the relevant T21s, simply re-ID them to the new E-RRW IDs and they will appear. Even easier to then copy the L2 ERRW to L1 ERRW, since the ID schemes are 0x5D6 (L1) and 0x5D7 (L2), so you'd only need to change one digit of each id, then alter the height of every prop from 15.5m (or 15m) to 7.5. Of course that's easier said than done, the first thing to check is if the rotations are the same. If not, then you've got to adjust the position of the props on the T21 to reflect the changes, which creates a lot more work. But if you are interested in digging into this area, I can certainly help with the how.
QuoteI also had to delete all but the viaducts and catenaries folders of the RUM in order to prevent the re-emergence of those horrid under-rail dirt blocks.
The way Rivit's mod works, you get all "styles", but should only leave one behind. After doing that, there are a series of files named something like A0_XXXX, remove all such files except the one named A0_Transparent_Earth, which ensures the dirt becomes invisible.
Quote from: dicko6 on September 25, 2021, 11:11:30 PM
Following on from mgb's suggestion, I have compiled a set of 16 different RRW textures using the GoFSH scripts - some just for fun, others for use. It's so versatile, and I had a lot of fun testing out various textures in-game!
Since you guys have gone to all the effort to make the necessary tools available to the public and not many seem to have used them, I'd like to make them available for anyone to download. I've set the archive up so that it's literally a drag-and-drop into the plugins folder. Each texture pack is about 25mb compressed and the whole kit is 387mb, (2x ~190mb rar files currently) which is nothing in terms of download time but might be a bit on the large side as far as servers go - I'm having a bit of trouble uploading them to the STEX on SimTropolis, keep running into errors even after splitting up the files, and there's a 2MB limit here on the forums.
Any suggestions on where to make these available for others, preferably even those who don't frequent these forums? Here's a scaled down preview pic:
UPDATE: Here's a download link to both parts, but it's a free service so I believe there's an expiry date.
https://we.tl/t-imzXR1brWH (https://we.tl/t-imzXR1brWH)
One option is to host these files in a dedicated file hosting service, such as Google Drive, Dropbox, or who knows, maybe even ModDB; and link the contents to a suitable forum post.
As for the link you provided, it already expired, so the files are no longer accessible through it. I was able to download everything, same with a few other fellow NAM team members and associates. If you want to follow up on the subject, we can make the corresponding arrangements to properly get your RRW re-skin into the hands of all interested players.
Alex,
Looks promising.
I noticed a problem with RRW over RHW 4-10 as it kicks the RHW to the right (see the attached).
dyoungyn
Quote from: dyoungyn on November 20, 2021, 05:22:07 AM
Alex,
Looks promising.
I noticed a problem with RRW over RHW 4-10 as it kicks the RHW to the right (see the attached).
dyoungyn
Are you on NAM 42? This issue was fixed already.
Yes I am in NAM 42. I too also thought it was fixed. I did not have this problem with NAM 38 and beyond until NAM 42.
I have been widening my Freeways due to traffic and I had to make merging lanes to alleviate congestion at cross interchanges. The merging lanes spread past the rail hence I am re-doing.
I ended up pumping it up to 15M and using the legacy Rail over RHW pieces for the same effect.
Quote from: dyoungyn on November 20, 2021, 05:52:56 PM
Yes I am in NAM 42. I too also thought it was fixed. I did not have this problem with NAM 38 and beyond until NAM 42.
I have been widening my Freeways due to traffic and I had to make merging lanes to alleviate congestion at cross interchanges. The merging lanes spread past the rail hence I am re-doing.
I ended up pumping it up to 15M and using the legacy Rail over RHW pieces for the same effect.
Please double check your installation, make sure there's no old NAM files hanging around. Also make sure you don't have an old version of rivit's RUM, I think around NAM 36 to 37 these models moved from RUM to NAM and they may have gotten switched. I'm almost 100% certain this is no longer an issue in NAM 42. I even recreated it:
I am trying to do RRW OxD RHW-10S, and it is just not working. Has this been implemented, and I have it installed improperly, or is this in the works?
Quote from: roadgeek on February 11, 2023, 02:20:11 PMI am trying to do RRW OxD RHW-10S, and it is just not working. Has this been implemented, and I have it installed improperly, or is this in the works?
It's not supported at this point in time. I believe RHW x ERRW crossings are OxO-only at this point.
-Alex