C4BHWO/OR Project

[schm0 27]

This is the very first post of the newly announced Citizens For Better Highway On/Off-Ramps Project, or C4BHWO/OR Project for short. Yes, the acronym is a joke, but I'm totally serious about the project and am willing to dive in (even though I know nothing) to help this project come to fruition. Here's what I'm looking for:

Taking this:

And turning it into something like this:

(Pardon my horrible photoshop-editing skills)

I am currently recruiting anyone who can help, specifically:

** People with transit-enabling experience (any level) -- whether it's for your lots or if you've worked on any NAM project and can offer experience and insight.

** People with texturing experience -- take the current NAM on/off ramp textures and modify them to function as pictured (see above) without clashing with the current NAM style.

** People that have worked on the NAM and understand how to make it compatible with the latest update.

** People with time on their hands to offer critique and analysis, and perhaps a helpful pointer here and there.

My experience is limited, but I offer my time and services to those with a bit of patience so I can assist in the project. We can think up of a new acronym or specific project title in the mean time. Anyone on board?

[schm0 27]

Ok, guys... 65 views and no responses?

At least let me know what you all think about the project.

[wouanagaine 83]

I will download this for sure

[DFire870 2]

I'll definitely download this when it's included in the NAM. We already have the elevated regular on/off-ramps, so I'm not sure why it's taken this long to get the ground highway ramps done.

[sc4portugal 10]

I will download it.

[nerdly_dood 26]

i think i heard about something called the modular interchange something, MIS for short

my guess is it will be quite a while before it can be released.

[schm0 27]

I think that it's part of the RHW Project, but I'm not sure.

[jgehrts 18]

Indeed it is. https://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=124&threadid=67624&enterthread=y

[schm0 27]

Ok, so how do we get it to work with normal highways?

[jgehrts 18]

Can't, that I know of. It's an extension of the RHW highways, not the original ones.

[schm0 27]

Still waiting to hear back from the RHW team... As soon as I know more I'll know if we need to start our own project or if we can use the existing MIS to apply it to normal highways. All I'm looking to create is a couple more puzzle pieces.

[benvoliothefirst 36]

I like your thinking, schmO. I agree that some of the things people have come up with for interchanges, while clever and functional, aren't very aesthetically pleasing. I'd offer to help, but my time is very limited and I don't have many skills you'd find useful. Having said that, however, I think you're on the right track, and I support your efforts. I hope that you can find a way to integrate what you're doing with the NAM and RHW interchange systems. Good luck!

I do think that the word "aesthetics" needs to be included in whatever acronym you come up with, however. "Aesthetically Pleasing Onramps Project," maybe? APOP? Does that sound too much like "J-Pop?"

[JCarter 0]

While I am not on the RHW team, I can tell you as an avid follower that the MIS is exclusive to the RHW...as a matter of fact, the MIS makes no provisions for connections from the RHW to the vanilla highways.

[schm0 27]

So we do need this project. Ok, modders, let's get going!

[hoshattack 0]

Although the MIS doesn't work for the original highways, the RHW is going to have a connection of RHW to FHW, so that should solve most of your problems. Plus, I think that once the RHW, MIS, and the rest of the NWM (Network-Widening-Mod) are completed, you might find that you won't want to even use the FHW's.

The first installment of the MIS should be coming around soon, in a month or so I'd guess; but you can still do this project if you want, as it is certainly not a bad idea.

Well, that's my 2 cents.

[schm0 27]

I'm not particularly fond of the textures/style of the RHW for every area of my city. Certainly, it fits into a rural setting, but the original highways look great and I intend to keep them. Still looking for:

** People with transit-enabling experience (any level) -- whether it's for your lots or if you've worked on any NAM project and can offer experience and insight.

** People with texturing experience -- take the current NAM on/off ramp textures and modify them to function as pictured (see above) without clashing with the current NAM style.

** People that have worked on the NAM and understand how to make it compatible with the latest update.

** People with time on their hands to offer critique and analysis, and perhaps a helpful pointer here and there.

[schm0 27]

Bumpity-bump. Please help this project stay alive!

[packerfan386 3]

I'll get in line to download...DO NOT give up on this project the urban freeways need new interchanges too.....

[Cob92 360]

Originally posted by: schm0 I'm not particularly fond of the textures/style of the RHW for every area of my city. Certainly, it fits into a rural setting, but the original highways look great and I intend to keep them.quote>

I agree. I need good urban highways to use in my city center as well, and the originals' "concrete slab" look fits perfectly. The major cities are the focal points of my regions, and I want them to look as good as possible. 

[jplumbley 5]

If you get the models, created, textured and LODed. I can probably take it from the LOD format into the game with some help on the pathing.

The model must first be created. Then the model must be separated into 16mx16m pieces based on their tile position. Then they must be textured and then made into SC4model files (I think). Then the RUL code must be written (this is where I can help). It then must be added to the rotation ring for interchanges, and pathed. I might be missing a step in there... There are a few.

But if you can follow Redlotus' Interchange Tutorial and get it into the SC4models, then I can probably take it from there. I cannot take raw model files because I refuse to learn Gmax, I have AutoCAD and Gmax drives me insane.

[schm0 27]

Ok, some progress.

Well, this is interesting. I will try working on a rough model in GMAX right away, but BATting is not my best talent. We should make a sunken highway to ground level (15m) version, a regular ground highway version, and an elevated highway version. Can't we just mod the original models and delete the part that extends back? Just model the wall through it and over the road to the other side... Does this make sense?

[hconline 0]

The stub on the end of the onramp is because a road is a two way network. One way on/offramp traffic onto/off a two way road doesn't work. If you used a oneway road section it would make sense though.

Do you get it? The lane going opposite the ramp traffic would have collisions.

Also, you could just make the ramp slope confroming, rather than a default height/depth.

[schm0 27]

The exit ramps this project hopes to achieve are one-way exits. Slope conforming models, huh? This is getting more complex by the minute. I just want to talk to the wonderful creators of the NAM project and see if they have any advice on how to make such a thing.

[Haljackey 17,302]

recyclerman: This has been attempted many times, but abandoned because it is just so complicated.

See the early pages in the NAM: discussion and development threads on their progress and why they had to cancel their work-in-progress!

This is the closest they got before canceling the project

[JCarter 0]

  Although the MIS doesn't work for the original highways, the RHW is going to have a connection of RHW to FHW, so that should solve most of your problems. Plus, I think that once the RHW, MIS, and the rest of the NWM (Network-Widening-Mod) are completed, you might find that you won't want to even use the FHW's. quote>

I'm almost positive that Tarkus said no, he isnt making that connection but if he changes his mind, he wont be doing anytime soon...thats what he said in the thread a few months ago.

[schm0 27]

haljackey: that exit currently exists. But as you can see, it extends backwards behind the exit ramp. I'm talking something pictured above like what recyclerman.

JCarter: That's fine. The RHW is nice, but I want it's not the end-all of highways. What I would like to see is what I've proposed.

recyclerman: THAT IS JUST WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. That pic for the NAM, where did you get it? That could totally be transferred into what we are proposing, couldn't it? the network would just have to pathed for one-way, right? Fantastic model! Is there anything I can do to help?If you want to share the model with me, maybe we can exchange touch-ups or something... I dunno how this whole thing works.

Anyone else interested in this project, feel free to join in!

[Xyloxadoria 1,099]

I saw this thread and would just like to post something i was  able to do with the new NAM, if anyone wants a tutorial of how to make this exit  (it's harder than it looks), I will make one.

I personally like this type of exit because it is very common where i live (Semi-Rural Kansas)

Click on the picture to see a full resolution image.

EDIT: What website  do you use to  display images, i can't get mine to work

[Haljackey 17,302]

Xyloxadoria: I Use a program called "Infranview" to convert the PNG images from the game into JPEGs.

Then, I use imageshack to host the images. The size limitation is 800x600, so you can hyperlink the image to the larger image hosted there for full resolution.

Finially, if you don't want to link your image to a higher resolution, you can use a nifty program called "Microsoft image resizer" to resize your images so they dont look nearly as stretched or compressed as they would with the "edit image" button on the reply page.

By the way, good job with that interchange! It doesn't "look" so hard to make. Your slope grades look a little steep though, you may want to create a more gradual assent/decent for the overpass. You should post this image on the "show us your interchanges!" thread in city-building concepts page.

[siso43 13]

don't worry i think this problem has a not a change, maybe can any find a good idear good luck

[JCarter 0]

JCarter: That's fine. The RHW is nice, but I want it's not the end-all of highways. What I would like to see is what I've proposed. quote>

I know, Im agreeing with you. Personally, I will probaly use both to give each of my highways their own unique characteristics

EDIT: You probaly confused me with hoshattack, (s)he is the one who said that the RHW will eliminate the need for the FHW