• Moose
  • Announcements

    • Dirktator

      Please help us for June & July   06/20/2017

      This month we're hoping for a little bit of a boost this month or next, in addition to covering the regular bills, we'd love to be able to do some hardware upgrades. STEX Collector's Set gifts can now be sent to you via digital download as well as regular mail if you wish! Every donation dollar goes toward keeping Simtropolis online and humming along. Your contribution is so meaningful, every dollar counts! Hardware Upgrades We've received a recommendation to consider some hardware upgrades to our ageing server. As our website community software improves with more and more features, and as we bolt on additional features such as chat, the increased load to handle all these new toys is taking the server a bit to task. You may have noticed that we'd been forced to temporarily disable the chat as we worked out allocating resources for more optimal performance. Following this, we've applied a number of 'soft' changes such as caching options and experimented with server configurations (nginx as proxy, for example), so the hardware aspect is also an area we'd like to focus on. The last time we upgraded hardware was back in 2012, prior to the release of SC13. Your contribution means a lot! Your donation will go toward helping us to 1.) migrate to a newer server or 2.) at least get some ram/cpu/storage updates and any other infrastructure hardware or services. Donate and Get a Gift or Donate Any Amount Thanks so much! - Dirktator & The Admins
    • Dirktator

      Chat is back...   06/22/2017

      In order to conserve resources, we've disabled the global chatbar at the bottom of the site. Instead, the Chat can be accessed by clicking the top navigation tab. It will launch a new window. If you're not seeing this behavior, try clearing your browser's cache.
Alecz20

Avenues vs one-way roads

19 posts in this topic

First of all let's put some numbers (all costs are per one tile):

== One way roads ==

Cost to build: §10 (§20 for both ways)

Maintenance: §0.10 (§0.20 for both ways)

== Avenues ==

Cost to build: §60 (for both ways)

Maintenance: §1.00 (for both ways)

From my understanding when reading several walkthroughs, guides, and tips&tricks, Two one way roads, side by side, in opposite directions are equivalent (capacity & speed) with one avenue. But from the numbers above, the avenues are three times more expensive to build and five times more expensive to maintain.

Additionally, I recently found out that NAM actually increases the speed and/or capacity of one way streets (due to green wave phenomenon). Moreover, when placing two one way streets you can choose to leave a tile in between for green space, trees, or transit stops.

Given all these reasons, why would anyone choose to use avenues instead of adjacent one way roads?

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given all these reasons, why would anyone choose to use avenues instead of adjacent one way roads?

One big thing to remember: OWRs can't make neighbour connections, so AVE use is inevitable.

Personally, AVEs look aesthetically appealing to me. Additionally, crossings with the OWR don't line up properly. For example, the stop line on an OWR/Rail crossing. The stop line will only look proper if the OWR goes in one direction only; Props and textures cannot tell the direction of the OWR's pathing (which is dictated by this thing called "Tidal Flow"), therefore half of your OWR intersections (assuming you're dragging two sets of OWRs, one in each direction) will look improper (signals or stop lines on the wrong end).

Also, the reason OWRs have greater capacity than AVEs is to reflect the real-life advantages of an OWR, so I wouldn't take advantage of OWRs due to a simple capacity boost.

I should mention though: AVE and Road capacity were equalized from their default values (AVEs had five times the capacity of Roads, and probably the same with OWRs but I'm not sure on that). And it's also possible to equalize the costs of everything to, for example, ONE simoleon per OWR, AVE, Road, and Street tile.


  Edited by Ganaram DI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, you have a few points:

- To connect, you can make avenue at edge of map, it is true.

- The aesthetic of the avenue is a plus.

However, I think that there is some issue with the cost. I feel that avenues are overpriced, since the OWR alternative is much cheaper. This alone is the single most important advantage!

So aesthetics aside, are there any other reasons why I should choose Avenues over complementary OWR's?

I didn't get this part:

AVE and Road capacity were equalized from their default values (AVEs had five times the capacity of Roads, and probably the same with OWRs but I'm not sure on that).

So do avenues still have five times the capacity of roads? (with the NAM)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, you have a few points:

- To connect, you can make avenue at edge of map, it is true.

- The aesthetic of the avenue is a plus.

However, I think that there is some issue with the cost. I feel that avenues are overpriced, since the OWR alternative is much cheaper. This alone is the single most important advantage!

So aesthetics aside, are there any other reasons why I should choose Avenues over complementary OWR's?

I didn't get this part:

AVE and Road capacity were equalized from their default values (AVEs had five times the capacity of Roads, and probably the same with OWRs but I'm not sure on that).

So do avenues still have five times the capacity of roads? (with the NAM)

According to the NAM documentation (10A.Traffic_Plugin_Files.htm) the following per tile network capacites for each version of the NAM simulator exist:

Network Classic Low Medium High Ultra

Road: 1200 2400 4000 6000 12000

Avenue: 1400 2400 4000 6000 12000

One-Way Road: 1800 3600 6000 9000 18000

So one-way roads would seem to have a higher per tile network capacity for any given version of the simulator, though with some other disadvantages mentioned by Ganaram DI


  Edited by glazert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the NAM documentation (10A.Traffic_Plugin_Files.htm) the following per tile network capacites for each version of the NAM simulator exist:

Network Classic Low Medium High Ultra

Road: 1200 2400 4000 6000 12000

Avenue: 1400 2400 4000 6000 12000

One-Way Road: 1800 3600 6000 9000 18000

So one-way roads would seem to have a higher per tile network capacity for any given version of the simulator, though with some other disadvantages mentioned by Ganaram DI

Thanks for the reply, those numbers are very informative!

So far, I am inclined to think that I am better off using OWR instead of avenues except for connecting to neighbours and eventually terminating HWY's

I am sad to see that I won't be having a lot of avenues, even if I had lots of money. The increased capacity of the OWR makes them the winner.


  Edited by Alecz20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason AVE and Road capacities were equalized (and I think the costs should also be equalized) was to make another NAM plugin more usable.

There's a NAM plugin called the Network Widening Mod and, as its name implies, offers wider versions of the pre-existing networks. In other words, there's an AVE network that's even wider than the default AVE (AVE-4): The AVE-6. Since that (and just about every two-way network in the NWM) is made from the Road network and assuming the default costs, building an AVE-6 would be cheaper than an AVE-4, with the addition to a higher capacity boost. In addition to wider AVEs, asymmetrical roads, and roads with central turn-lane medians, there are also wider OWRs, up to OWR-5.

Why not use two OWR-3's parallel with each other? Well, you could, but it doesn't look aesthetically appealing, either. Also, there's no way to connect OWR-3's to an AVE-6 (well, at least not yet).

Why not use parallel OWR-4's or parallel OWR-5's? Once again you could, but there's no way to neighbour connect them, and they're actually larger than the AVE-6's (and the currently unavailable AVE-8's) footprint.

Additionally, with all OWRs, you'll still face the signalization problems previously mentioned with the default OWR (OWR-2), but the way that was handled was by removing all the signals.

-----

I should also bring up a few other things:

- Some items CANNOT connect to OWRs properly (Try connecting OWRs to an AVE roundabout the same way you would with an AVE).

- There are pieces called TuLEPs that you can use to add turn-lanes to your networks, but none are available for OWRs.

- Some intersection configurations are impossible to do with a single-tile network. (AVEs can make 8-way intersections.)

- If you tried to draw two OWRs parallel to each other DIAGONALLY, you'll find that it takes more space than an AVE. Even if you could do that in the same footprint as the AVE, you'll have major problems with the curve.

- Speaking of curves, OWR has no curve pieces, or any sort of Fractional-Angle variation. Only Roads and AVEs have FA-variations (and what that means is that you can build your networks in an angle that isn't 45-degrees to the orthogonal networks).


  Edited by Ganaram DI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the default Maxis traffic simulator settings, One-Way Roads had 4 times the capacity of standard Roads--20% less than Avenues.

The difficulties of doing anything involving the creation of "override networks" (as exist in the NWM) has really led to an "identity crisis" for the Avenue and One-Way Road networks in the modern modded era. Part of the complication with the whole cost issue that you pointed out is that while the monthly maintenance cost is controlled by the Traffic Simulator, the catalog cost for the networks is controlled by the Network Tuning Parameters Exemplars. The tuning exemplars are not modified by or included in the NAM, but are modified by a wide array of "Slope Mods". This creates some file architecture problems that prevent us from really being able to fully fix that discrepancy to make the Avenue seem worthwhile again. Unless, of course, the NAM Team decides to enter the Slope Mod market, which has been preliminarily discussed before.

The "original" specs for Network Widening Mod compatibility involved equalizing Roads, OWRs and Avenues, such that OWRs had no advantage over Avenues (which was the status quo for the old NAM Simulators A and B and some early versions of Simulator Z, the predecessor of today's NAM Simulator), but it was eventually changed such that OWRs were upped in capacity/speed because of the Green Wave and other associated properties of real-world OWRs.

When the OWR capacity change was made, z1, our resident traffic simulator expert, had proposed the possibility of this opening up a new class of higher-capacity dual-tile, two-way OWR-based networks, but as of yet, this has not been realized, as we haven't figured out the logistics of how to satisfactorily implement it yet.

There's also been discussion of converting the Avenue such that it'll look like the NWM's existing 4-lane "Medianless Avenue" (MAVE-4, to be renamed "Road-4" in the next release) and then making a Road or OWR-based network looking like the existing Avenue but with a split-tile (rather than shared-tile) diagonal setup, though that'll require quite a few more textures to be added.

-Tarkus


  Edited by Tarkus
APSMS and jeffryfisher like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for the explanations.

I have installed NWM and now I better understand what you mean.

Now I am considering using "Turning Lane Avenue - 5" instead of the original game avenues, but there are some difficulties creating overpasses and intersections.

From the data at http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1200.0, I see that the avenue I am considering has a capacity of 3000, same as Median Avenue 6 (which has 6 lanes), and same as HWY (also 6 lanes).

Is this the intended purpose? How can it be reasonably exlplained (i.e. a 5 lane avenue having the same capacity as a 6 lane avenue and a 6 lane HWY).

Thanks again for pointing me to the NWM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the intended purpose? How can it be reasonably exlplained (i.e. a 5 lane avenue having the same capacity as a 6 lane avenue and a 6 lane HWY).

Are your referring to the MAVE-6? (They'll likely be renamed to RD-6 later on...)

Ideally, the AVE-4 and TLA-5 should have the same capacity (and that's how it was at one point), but because of how the DIP effect works on the TLA-5, it has more capacity than an AVE-4, and also has the same capacity as the RD-6.

What's the DIP effect, you ask? All intersections have 25% more capacity than most of the other tiles, and intersections are defined as a network tile with paths coming out of at least three of the edges.

Add dummy paths to the RD-6, RD-3, NRD-4, and RHW-6S, and you can trick the game into giving these networks a higher capacity. However, networks that have TLA effects and crossover paths (IE, TLA-3, TLA-5, AVE-6, TLA-7, OWR-4, OWR-5, and RHW-6C and 8S and above) will also exhibit the DIP effect because of how they're pathed. The TLA paths are a part of the TLA's functionality (you'll see cars make left turns in the middle of the road), and the crossover paths ensure proper functionality of wider networks (without them, each tile will act as completely separate networks).

So the TLA-5 having the same capacity as the RD-6 is a side effect of giving the RD-6 and other networks more capacity. There's really no way to determine a network tile's capacity by the number of lanes; All the values are preset.

jeffryfisher likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

in the transition pieces there's  a piece for OWR-1 to OWR-2 transition but...i can't find the starter piece for the OWR-2.

Where's my fault ?

ps.: best tutorial for me is watching Houston layout on Google heart...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no starter piece for OWR-2. Starter pieces are only necessary for "Override Networks", i.e. new ones that we've added to the game. So OWR-2 is the base OWR network, which will be drawn using the OWR tool (top of the road menu). OWR-1 & OWR-3/4/5 are all overrides of the OWR-2 network. These will need starters to get going, but are similarly drawn thereafter using the OWR tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again :-)

 question of the day : in the Basic tuleps menu there's a Road/single skipe lane interface but i can't find the way to use it.  I know is a puzzle piece  and I know the "plop method" to use them on an existing network. I suppose the skip lane should continue with OWR 1 or OWR 2 but can't find a way to go on with the skip lane.

I know it's a bit annoing replay to a obvious question but  approaching NAM 35 from scratch is a big deal and diggind tons and tons of post to find and answer on a single tile is real pain ..

thank you :-)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check the link in my signature, I covered their usage in one of my NAM Tutorials.

But I think your basic problem is you are trying to use it incorrectly. This piece can only be used on the corners of an intersection.

MeMyself&I likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If TuLEPs don't intuitively make sense right now, I wouldn't even worry about trying to learn how to use them.  One of the main features for the upcoming NAM 36 release is FLEX Turn Lanes (FTLs), which will more or less render the whole TuLEPs system (including the existing slip lanes) obsolete.  I did a series of preview videos on the FTLs, which are all in this playlist.  Part 2 covers the new FTL slip lanes.

-Tarkus

MeMyself&I, jeffryfisher and rsc204 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to rsc204  : subscribed your channel one month ago but really, you are one of the most speedy mouse i've seen and probably i'm one of the most slow one (Edit----> not you :-)..confused with halijackey... Yes you right..on the corner of the intersection..perfect video thank you)

to tarkus : thank you and i'll check your channel too.

MeMyself&I likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Tarkus said:

Part 2 covers the new FTL slip lanes.

Wow, sounds like science fantasy. I can't wait to try an FTL drive in one of my cities!

And the discussion up top has persuaded me to replace all of my avenues with NWM alternatives. With zones lining my boulevards, I'm currently partial to the TLA's that offer double-sided access.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2017 at 1:06 AM, jeffryfisher said:

Wow, sounds like science fantasy. I can't wait to try an FTL drive in one of my cities!

And the discussion up top has persuaded me to replace all of my avenues with NWM alternatives. With zones lining my boulevards, I'm currently partial to the TLA's that offer double-sided access.

can't wait for the Hyperdrive lanes that will come after this hehe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, FTL is a subliminal superluminal reference to how fast future advanced intersection construction should be with the new Flex based system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an Account  

Sign up to join our friendly community. It's easy!  :thumb:


Register a New Account

Sign In  

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now


  •  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.