NAM: Requests - 2nd Edition

[Wiimeiser 444]

13 minutes ago, APSMS said:

If you want to do all the heavy lifting (which isn't that much), I'm sure someone from the NAM team could source you the files so that you can make your own Pink and Yellow road mod via Ilive's Reader and GoFSH, which is how the current alternate textures have been created. You're about as likely to get support for that request as you have been in times past but the steps to create your own mod have been made significantly easier if I understand correctly.

Same goes for RRW once the pieces have been fully compiled. That particular work has been planned since at least the last version; again the heavy lifting is up to you, but the "heavy" part is significantly lighter thanks to future-proofing work by MGB/@rsc204 and @Eggman121.

I just wanted to know how many sets have already been made, but thanks for the information. I'll have to look into this sometime, I guess...

[APSMS 1,892]

Likely, 1, since multi-style Euro network support ended when Mandelsoft left the community for ETS2 modding. All of the old styles are deprecated, so the NAM Team had to devise a way to create Euro style network textures that was not super labor intensive.

The resultant package is not the prettiest, but it is up to spec, gets the job done, and with minimal burnout to boot. I suspect it's easily adaptable; it's just not the most accurate when considering the RHW and any new network addons, since the biggest thing it does is turn the median white rather than yellow (IIRC). This was primarily for RHW networks, so road networks are essentially unchanged (they should still use Mandelsoft's improved Euro textures), but I believe there is strong consensus to update all the available files so that the approach MGB took with mods like the Sidewalk NAM can be easily implemented across the board and ease the NAM Team's burden of responding to ever present requests for texture variants a la the SAM.

Not that you can't ask, but this is likely to the be the dominating approach going forward.

[rsc204 21,808]

Thing is, the number of sets is not really the right question. Here's a teaser image I made when I came up with the system to automate these textures:

The point being, you just need to find two textures, one for the ballast, another for the sleepers. Then run an automated script, it will output a ready-to-go file with a custom set of RRW textures.

So the short answer is, the number of potential options is limitless. Which should mean plenty of options availible on the exchanges in the near future. Bear in mind, this project is still a WIP however.

[philforhockey51 4,211]

Forgive me if this has been requested before but I also doubt too many people play on cliffs so it might not be in great demand.

Has anyone looked into the maxis retaining/support walls and pillars that are created when a road is dragged along a cliff edge?  I have been working on a mountain region and was working a road along the side of a mtn and in playing around created a floating road curve as you can see below.

I'm sure this is not a top priority item and probably complicated (I don't know modding)   I'm curious about two things, one would it be possible to add the wall/pillar textures to the curves? and if it would be possible to retexture the walls, as in is this even a part of the game that can be modded? 

[metasmurf 705]

On 2016-11-14 at 2:56 PM, rsc204 said:

Thing is, the number of sets is not really the right question. Here's a teaser image I made when I came up with the system to automate these textures:

The point being, you just need to find two textures, one for the ballast, another for the sleepers. Then run an automated script, it will output a ready-to-go file with a custom set of RRW textures.

So the short answer is, the number of potential options is limitless. Which should mean plenty of options availible on the exchanges in the near future. Bear in mind, this project is still a WIP however.

Here's an idea for a texture. This railway was finished in 2010 so I guess other newly built railways looks the same. If you could send me one of those examples I can see if I can manage to make a good texture based on this design.

[rivit 3,391]

Something like this?

 

[fredinno 54]

May I suggest expansions to the very useful el-rail on road system (you can't do el rail over road on a diagonal rail crossing the road?) and more stacked transport networks (like L1 RHW on road, or monorail on road).

Though that latter part would be an entirely new system...

 

Or even just elrail-GLR crossings.

 

Also, is there any way to make the tram-on-road draggables (and el-rail on road) more intuitive? Maybe a system like the NWM where starter pieces are used, and road is dragged out on it. Is that viable?

 

Are more NWM roundabouts also on the list (the system here is limited like NWM transitions were before the latest update)? I know NWM overpasses aren't being pursed right now due to wanting to concentrate elsewhere...

[fredinno 54]

On 2016-11-20 at 10:11 AM, philforhockey51 said:

Forgive me if this has been requested before but I also doubt too many people play on cliffs so it might not be in great demand.

Has anyone looked into the maxis retaining/support walls and pillars that are created when a road is dragged along a cliff edge?  I have been working on a mountain region and was working a road along the side of a mtn and in playing around created a floating road curve as you can see below.

I'm sure this is not a top priority item and probably complicated (I don't know modding)   I'm curious about two things, one would it be possible to add the wall/pillar textures to the curves? and if it would be possible to retexture the walls, as in is this even a part of the game that can be modded? 

A similar thing happens with diagonal streets at intersections. It's a graphical glitch that's probably never going to be solved, because solving it usually comes down to designing road/street layouts slightly differently.

[Tarkus 6,932]

On 11/20/2016 at 10:11 AM, philforhockey51 said:

Forgive me if this has been requested before but I also doubt too many people play on cliffs so it might not be in great demand.

Has anyone looked into the maxis retaining/support walls and pillars that are created when a road is dragged along a cliff edge?  I have been working on a mountain region and was working a road along the side of a mtn and in playing around created a floating road curve as you can see below.

I'm sure this is not a top priority item and probably complicated (I don't know modding)   I'm curious about two things, one would it be possible to add the wall/pillar textures to the curves? and if it would be possible to retexture the walls, as in is this even a part of the game that can be modded? 

The Diagonal Bridge Enabler is actually reliant on the retaining wall functionality.  It is possible to add it to new network pieces, though there's not really any way to influence its shape, so it's likely that it wouldn't conform to the curve.  I think it merits an experiment at the very least, however.

 

7 hours ago, fredinno said:

May I suggest expansions to the very useful el-rail on road system (you can't do el rail over road on a diagonal rail crossing the road?) and more stacked transport networks (like L1 RHW on road, or monorail on road).

Though that latter part would be an entirely new system...

 

Or even just elrail-GLR crossings.

 

Also, is there any way to make the tram-on-road draggables (and el-rail on road) more intuitive? Maybe a system like the NWM where starter pieces are used, and road is dragged out on it. Is that viable?

 

Are more NWM roundabouts also on the list (the system here is limited like NWM transitions were before the latest update)? I know NWM overpasses aren't being pursed right now due to wanting to concentrate elsewhere...

I'll go down the list here.

-L1 RHW-on-Road can't happen due to path jumping, and there are no plans for any sort of Monorail development.  El Rail-over-Road x Diagonal Rail is a rather specialized setup, and not easily implemented.

-It's unlikely that we can go that far with reimplementing the Tram Dual-Networking draggables.  The game has some limitations in terms of which path types are supported on given base networks, and the El Rail/Light Rail/Tram paths may not operate at all on a fully Road-based implementation.  We already have reports that the existing Tram-on-Road setup (with the Rail overclick) is not working as intended, and the likely re-implementation would require a starter plus the El-Rail overclick, or going to a "pseudo-draggable" setup (FLEX pieces).

-The new "RealExpressway" (REW) project, started by eggman121, is planned to add additional roundabout functionality, using the NWM's One-Way Road network expansions.  The mechanics for implementing that functionality and the networks that would be supported have yet to be fully determined, however.  There are other projects afoot (including the REW and RHW) that may require the development of viaducts for the NWM OWR networks and the AVE-6 to be moved higher up on the priority list.

-Tarkus

[fredinno 54]

16 hours ago, Tarkus said:

-It's unlikely that we can go that far with reimplementing the Tram Dual-Networking draggables.  The game has some limitations in terms of which path types are supported on given base networks, and the El Rail/Light Rail/Tram paths may not operate at all on a fully Road-based implementation.  We already have reports that the existing Tram-on-Road setup (with the Rail overclick) is not working as intended, and the likely re-implementation would require a starter plus the El-Rail overclick, or going to a "pseudo-draggable" setup (FLEX pieces).

welp. That sucks.

16 hours ago, Tarkus said:

-L1 RHW-on-Road can't happen due to path jumping, and there are no plans for any sort of Monorail development.  El Rail-over-Road x Diagonal Rail is a rather specialized setup, and not easily implemented.

Wasn't there the RealMonorail or RealHSR project (or something along that line) going on in NAM?

I used El-Rail over Road x Diagonal Rail as an example... There are numerous other pieces missing from the El-rail-over road system. Not to mention the lack of a draggable function- maybe one way would be to remove the 'partially draggable' tram system to make a draggable system fully compatible with El-Rail by dragging El-rail over road/street/one-way road/avenue/pedmall/rail?/NWM?.

Though I have no idea the work needed behind it.

16 hours ago, Tarkus said:

 

-The new "RealExpressway" (REW) project, started by eggman121, is planned to add additional roundabout functionality, using the NWM's One-Way Road network expansions.  The mechanics for implementing that functionality and the networks that would be supported have yet to be fully determined, however.  There are other projects afoot (including the REW and RHW) that may require the development of viaducts for the NWM OWR networks and the AVE-6 to be moved higher up on the priority list.

Are there any planned expansions (roundabouts, viaducts, FLUPS) for NWM-1 tile MRD-derived networks (ie. NRD-3)?

 

 

Also, a bit off topic, but does anyone have a Monorail/BTM to HSR transition? I can't find any.

[Tarkus 6,932]

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Wasn't there the RealMonorail or RealHSR project (or something along that line) going on in NAM?

I used El-Rail over Road x Diagonal Rail as an example... There are numerous other pieces missing from the El-rail-over road system. Not to mention the lack of a draggable function- maybe one way would be to remove the 'partially draggable' tram system to make a draggable system fully compatible with El-Rail by dragging El-rail over road/street/one-way road/avenue/pedmall/rail?/NWM?.

Though I have no idea the work needed behind it.

Are there any planned expansions (roundabouts, viaducts, FLUPS) for NWM-1 tile MRD-derived networks (ie. NRD-3)?

Also, a bit off topic, but does anyone have a Monorail/BTM to HSR transition? I can't find any.

RealHSR, or RHSR, is a proposal that has been under serious consideration, and would produce an RRW-spec High Speed Rail system, with significant functional improvements over the existing HSR.  It would also be a Monorail replacement rather than a starter override, like the existing HSR.  It's on the back-burner at the moment, however.  Since HSR and Monorail aren't really compatible systems, there are no transitions between the two, and the NAM will never include such a transition, for realism purposes.

The method by which we were able to create the "partially draggable" Tram-on/in-Networks is pretty much the farthest extent we can go with that functionality, due to the game's hardcoded network hierarchies.  Fully dragging El-Rail over a Road does nothing, and there is no way to make it actually do something with the game's mechanics the way they are.

There will eventually be viaducts for the 1-tile NWM networks, though the OWR networks are the highest priority, followed at some distance by the NRD-4 and ARD-3.  The TLA-3 and AVE-2 (which really would just become a single network at the viaduct level) are at the bottom of the list.  FLUPs development is on hiatus, until we can get our long-rumored "alternate implementation" worked out, and there are currently no plans for any roundabout work outside of what eggman is doing with the REW.  One other area we are looking at expanding the NWM networks is diagonal intersections, but with all the pathing that is involved, it's been on the backburner for a long time, and would probably have to be broken up into at least a half-dozen phases in order to be feasible.

-Tarkus

[fredinno 54]

18 hours ago, Tarkus said:

RealHSR, or RHSR, is a proposal that has been under serious consideration, and would produce an RRW-spec High Speed Rail system, with significant functional improvements over the existing HSR.  It would also be a Monorail replacement rather than a starter override, like the existing HSR.  It's on the back-burner at the moment, however.  Since HSR and Monorail aren't really compatible systems, there are no transitions between the two, and the NAM will never include such a transition, for realism purposes.

The method by which we were able to create the "partially draggable" Tram-on/in-Networks is pretty much the farthest extent we can go with that functionality, due to the game's hardcoded network hierarchies.  Fully dragging El-Rail over a Road does nothing, and there is no way to make it actually do something with the game's mechanics the way they are.

There will eventually be viaducts for the 1-tile NWM networks, though the OWR networks are the highest priority, followed at some distance by the NRD-4 and ARD-3.  The TLA-3 and AVE-2 (which really would just become a single network at the viaduct level) are at the bottom of the list.  FLUPs development is on hiatus, until we can get our long-rumored "alternate implementation" worked out, and there are currently no plans for any roundabout work outside of what eggman is doing with the REW.  One other area we are looking at expanding the NWM networks is diagonal intersections, but with all the pathing that is involved, it's been on the backburner for a long time, and would probably have to be broken up into at least a half-dozen phases in order to be feasible.

-Tarkus

HSR would not be added to to expand monorail? It would seem to be easier to use what we have, and HSR has room for impovement.

 

I was wondering if any 3rd party made a HSR to monorail connector, but I guess the closest is connecting them both with subway.

Well, can't do much about the NWM ARD-3 roundabouts I guess- Viaducts are better than nothing

 

Quote

"alternate implementation"

???

[Wiimeiser 444]

HSR and Monorail technically aren't compatible from a vehicle standpoint, either. One network has two tracks for vehicles to run on while the other has one. The closest you could get would be a station that includes both...

[Tarkus 6,932]

11 hours ago, fredinno said:

Well, can't do much about the NWM ARD-3 roundabouts I guess- Viaducts are better than nothing

 

???

The ARD-3 does already have some roundabout support with the static roundabout pieces that MandelSoft made.  However, the cross networks are limited to Avenue, RD-4, and RD-6.

As far as the "alternate implementation" . . . it's a closely guarded secret.  The idea's been within the team for several years, and there's even been some internal prototypes.  There's still a lot of testing we'd need to do to ensure that the "alternate implementation" works as desired, and it's simply been on the backburner that whole time, as other projects and needs have intervened.  We're not going to be making anything FLUPs-related until we have that method ironed out, however.

-Tarkus

[fredinno 54]

14 hours ago, Wiimeiser said:

HSR and Monorail technically aren't compatible from a vehicle standpoint, either. One network has two tracks for vehicles to run on while the other has one. The closest you could get would be a station that includes both...

7 hours ago, Tarkus said:

The ARD-3 does already have some roundabout support with the static roundabout pieces that MandelSoft made.  However, the cross networks are limited to Avenue, RD-4, and RD-6.

As far as the "alternate implementation" . . . it's a closely guarded secret.  The idea's been within the team for several years, and there's even been some internal prototypes.  There's still a lot of testing we'd need to do to ensure that the "alternate implementation" works as desired, and it's simply been on the backburner that whole time, as other projects and needs have intervened.  We're not going to be making anything FLUPs-related until we have that method ironed out, however.

-Tarkus

A bit of a stupid question, but what is the motive for RHSR over expanding the dormant HSR project?

I wanted BTM-HSR because I wanted a ground-level BTM system, AND a Double-height system to go over my el highways...

Monorail with BTM uses the same # of tracks as HSR...

There is a station that has both, but it's freaking massive- all I want is to have a ground-based HSR/Monorail system

 

 

[Tarkus 6,932]

3 hours ago, fredinno said:

A bit of a stupid question, but what is the motive for RHSR over expanding the dormant HSR project?

It requires a ton less RUL2 code, and can be reliant on more INRUL code instead.  A lot of the fancy stuff the RRW can do is INRUL-based, and can be ported directly over that way.

-Tarkus

[fredinno 54]

2 hours ago, Tarkus said:

It requires a ton less RUL2 code, and can be reliant on more INRUL code instead.  A lot of the fancy stuff the RRW can do is INRUL-based, and can be ported directly over that way.

-Tarkus

So it's easier to work with and allows for more complex configurations and draggables?

[Tarkus 6,932]

Exactly.  It's also easier for us to implement that way, and will result in a much more compact codebase.  The RUL2 overrides for the starter piece-based HSRP were kind of a mess, and the attempt to fix them during the marathon NAM 33 cycle created new issues.

-Tarkus

[fredinno 54]

19 hours ago, Tarkus said:

Exactly.  It's also easier for us to implement that way, and will result in a much more compact codebase.  The RUL2 overrides for the starter piece-based HSRP were kind of a mess, and the attempt to fix them during the marathon NAM 33 cycle created new issues.

-Tarkus

 

 

Funny how there isn't even seem to be a way to transition a HSR to El HSR (or at least that I know of- dragging doesn't work, and there is no 3rd party mod or puzzle piece). Thus, why I asked for BTM to HSR transitions.

 

Maybe I missed it somewhere? I hope I did.

 

[rsc204 21,808]

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Funny how there isn't even seem to be a way to transition a HSR to El HSR (or at least that I know of- dragging doesn't work, and there is no 3rd party mod or puzzle piece). Thus, why I asked for BTM to HSR transitions.

Of course there is, there are two actually, both a ramp and an on-slope transition. Select one of the HSR starters and press TAB to cycle through the available pieces. You see, HSR was not made as a draggable network, but mostly works with puzzle pieces. Sure you can use the BTM or Monorail in addition to HSR, but as a network it only supports L2 / L4 heights. Whereas HSR only supports L0 / L2.

One great reason for a RRW-type HSR to exists is that likely it will mirror the L0/L1/L2 functionality we're most used to nowadays. Of course IF it happens, it's still a ways off, but I'm certainly excited by the prototypes.

It should also be noted, that as an override network (HSR), of the default monorail network, you can't drag HSR and Monorail/BTM together. Like with two SAM networks, these can never touch each other, since the override would continue until it reached a puzzle piece or TE lot. However use of either will act like a "override stopper", allowing changing between the two at a station for example. Both are simply considered monorail by the game, so there are no issues with it working.

[fredinno 54]

On 2016-12-06 at 11:49 AM, rsc204 said:

Of course there is, there are two actually, both a ramp and an on-slope transition. Select one of the HSR starters and press TAB to cycle through the available pieces. You see, HSR was not made as a draggable network, but mostly works with puzzle pieces. Sure you can use the BTM or Monorail in addition to HSR, but as a network it only supports L2 / L4 heights. Whereas HSR only supports L0 / L2.

One great reason for a RRW-type HSR to exists is that likely it will mirror the L0/L1/L2 functionality we're most used to nowadays. Of course IF it happens, it's still a ways off, but I'm certainly excited by the prototypes.

It should also be noted, that as an override network (HSR), of the default monorail network, you can't drag HSR and Monorail/BTM together. Like with two SAM networks, these can never touch each other, since the override would continue until it reached a puzzle piece or TE lot. However use of either will act like a "override stopper", allowing changing between the two at a station for example. Both are simply considered monorail by the game, so there are no issues with it working.

Well, darn. Never thought of using TAB. *Facepalm*

Of course, it would be so simple...

 

 

Regardless, would it be possible to make a FLUP-style puzzle piece bridge network- might be useful for RHW and PedMall...

Would a One Way Road Neighbour Connection Mod (done like the NWM neighbour connections) be possible?

Also, a draggable Rail viaduct would be useful- hopefully also being compatible with NWM and the such.

[rsc204 21,808]

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Regardless, would it be possible to make a FLUP-style puzzle piece bridge network- might be useful for RHW and PedMall...

Well the Pedmalls already contain a modular system of bridges. Again, with the PedMall selected use TAB to cycle through to them. Pieces for crossing many networks exist along with an on-slope and end pieces.

There has been some discussion on expanding the pedbridge functionality recently, maybe that comes to something?

Quote

Would a One Way Road Neighbour Connection Mod (done like the NWM neighbour connections) be possible?

I believe there are technical barriers for OWR networks.

Quote

Also, a draggable Rail viaduct would be useful- hopefully also being compatible with NWM and the such.

Has been in development a while. I'm pretty certain NWM support is on the agenda at some point too.

[fredinno 54]

18 minutes ago, rsc204 said:

Well the Pedmalls already contain a modular system of bridges. Again, with the PedMall selected use TAB to cycle through to them. Pieces for crossing many networks exist along with an on-slope and end pieces.

I know those bridges exist, but none are over maxis water. I was wondering if FLUP technology could allow for Pedmall bridges and if that would ever happen.

19 minutes ago, rsc204 said:

I believe there are technical barriers for OWR networks.

Well, there are already OWR NWM pieces, so being able to connect them and Maxis OWR to a neighbour would seem to be the logical next step alongside viaducts.

21 minutes ago, rsc204 said:

Has been in development a while. I'm pretty certain NWM support is on the agenda at some point too.

Cool! NAM 36?

For RRW, I would assume.

 

I'm probably missing something (as usual), but cycling though NAM lots using the TAB function doesn't seem to have a 7.5 to 0m and 15m road puzzle piece connection- dragging doesn't work, so...  

Sorry for the stupid question here.

[rsc204 21,808]

6 minutes ago, fredinno said:

I was wondering if FLUP technology could allow for Pedmall bridges and if that would ever happen.

Functioning bridges for pedestrians only? I couldn't say 100%, but I think it's technically possible. But it would have nothing to do with "FLUPs Technology", which in essence means "Puzzle Pieces".

7 minutes ago, fredinno said:

Well, there are already OWR NWM pieces, so being able to connect them and Maxis OWR to a neighbour would seem to be the logical next step alongside viaducts.

Perhaps. But if we're not able to make it work, there isn't a lot we can do about it. Since no OWR connections seem to exist, either there is a technical reason why it can't be done or it's never been enough of a priority to do it. Frankly, I'd transition the OWR for a neighbour connection to a dual-direction network. Usually you can do that very cleanly.

9 minutes ago, fredinno said:

Cool! NAM 36?

Can't say.

9 minutes ago, fredinno said:

For RRW, I would assume.

Absolutely. All new NAM rail development is focused solely upon RRW.

10 minutes ago, fredinno said:

I'm probably missing something (as usual), but cycling though NAM lots using the TAB function doesn't seem to have a 7.5 to 0m and 15m road puzzle piece connection- dragging doesn't work, so...  

You need either to use On-Slopes or Ramps. The Draggable version has Ramps and OnSlopes at the end of the Tab-Ring. As do the Puzzle based variants. Note if you start by using Shift and Tab together, you go backwards. So you can jump to the end of the list quickly if that's more efficient.

[Tarkus 6,932]

Regarding the neighbor connectors, there is a technical reason, and it's the same technical reason that requires the RHW Neighbor Connector Pieces for the wider RHW override networks.  Neighbor Connections are required to accept both outgoing and incoming trips at the same connection.  The game's pathfinding and neighbor connection routines don't have an ability to process a Neighbor Connection that only goes one way.  The routines aren't built to find another connection coming the other way out of the other city, in a different spot, to use as an alternative.  The RHW Neighbor Connectors trick this by introducing a momentary segment of dual-pathing, and then using the loop connection to route traffic back onto the correct side of the highway.

Doing this for the OWR is much more complicated, due to the fact that the network has no two-way form (like the RHW) that can make a neighbor connection.  I have a theory of how it could potentially be done, but it would likely require a multi-step construction process, in which one has to transition to an NC-supporting network (probably Road) one tile before the edge of the city tile, then stick a FLEX piece over top and build a loop connection.  The loop connector would prevent any zoning from being placed on the very edge of the city tile, between the two OWRs.  If the distance between the two OWRs is too large, it might also prevent the connection from being used.

The existing NWM NCs for the dual and triple-tile networks have also had reports of not working as intended, or at all--strange, considering that they're pathed almost identically to the RHW ones.  My idea for a solution would likely require a similar multi-step process.

-Tarkus

[Wiimeiser 444]

What appears to be the problem, and how would you fix it? Also, does it appear roads have a specific requirement for NCs? Does having an intersection at a vanilla road NC affect anything?

[Tarkus 6,932]

4 hours ago, Wiimeiser said:

What appears to be the problem, and how would you fix it? Also, does it appear roads have a specific requirement for NCs? Does having an intersection at a vanilla road NC affect anything?

I outlined the problem and potential solution in my previous post.  As long as the network has clear in and out points on the same network tile (or two tiles, in the case of Avenues and Maxis Highways), the game has no issue with the neighbor connection.  The Road intersection scenario would still work perfectly, as you'd still have the in and out points to the neighbor connection on the same tile.

If case anyone is wondering about whether or not an Avenue/MHW could be split and still have a viable neighbor connection, I've tried, the answer is no.  The game won't even allow the connection to be built that way.

-Tarkus

[fredinno 54]

23 hours ago, Tarkus said:

Regarding the neighbor connectors, there is a technical reason, and it's the same technical reason that requires the RHW Neighbor Connector Pieces for the wider RHW override networks.  Neighbor Connections are required to accept both outgoing and incoming trips at the same connection.  The game's pathfinding and neighbor connection routines don't have an ability to process a Neighbor Connection that only goes one way.  The routines aren't built to find another connection coming the other way out of the other city, in a different spot, to use as an alternative.  The RHW Neighbor Connectors trick this by introducing a momentary segment of dual-pathing, and then using the loop connection to route traffic back onto the correct side of the highway.

Doing this for the OWR is much more complicated, due to the fact that the network has no two-way form (like the RHW) that can make a neighbor connection.  I have a theory of how it could potentially be done, but it would likely require a multi-step construction process, in which one has to transition to an NC-supporting network (probably Road) one tile before the edge of the city tile, then stick a FLEX piece over top and build a loop connection.  The loop connector would prevent any zoning from being placed on the very edge of the city tile, between the two OWRs.  If the distance between the two OWRs is too large, it might also prevent the connection from being used.

The existing NWM NCs for the dual and triple-tile networks have also had reports of not working as intended, or at all--strange, considering that they're pathed almost identically to the RHW ones.  My idea for a solution would likely require a similar multi-step process.

-Tarkus

Maybe they aren't using the NWM connections properly?

 

I would assume a one-way RD neighbour connection would be on the bottom of the list right now, and a project on its own..?

On 2016-12-08 at 9:28 PM, rsc204 said:

Functioning bridges for pedestrians only? I couldn't say 100%, but I think it's technically possible. But it would have nothing to do with "FLUPs Technology", which in essence means "Puzzle Pieces".

The reason I compared it to FLUPs is because it would probably operate the same, just elevated instead of underground... - allowing it to go over water.

On 2016-12-08 at 9:28 PM, rsc204 said:

Perhaps. But if we're not able to make it work, there isn't a lot we can do about it. Since no OWR connections seem to exist, either there is a technical reason why it can't be done or it's never been enough of a priority to do it. Frankly, I'd transition the OWR for a neighbour connection to a dual-direction network. Usually you can do that very cleanly.

Tried to transition to Maxis Road for the connections- doesn't work. Seems like the traffic simulator got confused or something.

Or maybe I did something wrong. Dunno.

 

On 2016-12-08 at 9:28 PM, rsc204 said:

You need either to use On-Slopes or Ramps. The Draggable version has Ramps and OnSlopes at the end of the Tab-Ring. As do the Puzzle based variants. Note if you start by using Shift and Tab together, you go backwards. So you can jump to the end of the list quickly if that's more efficient.

I'll try that.

 

 

Also, just a side note, the BTM trains glitch at turns- not just 90* turns,, but also 45* turns. It's probably due to the train cars being too long (they look pretty though, better than the Maxis Monorail Cars), so is there a possibility of them being shortened to prevent this glitch?

[Tarkus 6,932]

30 minutes ago, fredinno said:

The reason I compared it to FLUPs is because it would probably operate the same, just elevated instead of underground... - allowing it to go over water.
 

It'd work just like a normal bridge.  Bridges don't work like puzzle pieces (which is what FLUPs are).  You can already put the Ped Overpass puzzle pieces that exist in water--or any other puzzle piece, for that matter--though it'll probably end up underwater.

30 minutes ago, fredinno said:

I would assume a one-way RD neighbour connection would be on the bottom of the list right now, and a project on its own..?

It's not a high priority at the moment.  It'd probably be tied into NWM development, as any solution would also need to tackle the other OWR widths, as well as the default 2-lane setup.

-Tarkus

[matias93 7,535]

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Also, just a side note, the BTM trains glitch at turns- not just 90* turns,, but also 45* turns. It's probably due to the train cars being too long (they look pretty though, better than the Maxis Monorail Cars), so is there a possibility of them being shortened to prevent this glitch?

To shorten the cars would be the task of an automata mod, which falls outside of the NAM competences (I'm pretty sure there are several dozens of high speed train automatas on the STEX). But in any case, 2x2 45° curves are absolutely unrealistic for normal-sized trains, left alone high speed trains. Sadly, the BTM has only a couple of puzzle-based wide radius curves to solve that, so is somehow stuck on that problem. I don't know if is only an optic illusion, but I remember the HSR paths being softer on the curves, so maybe that could be a better option (in spite of its overly futuristic look).

Lastly, while the aforementioned RHSR is being developed, I think that you can achieve a very good high speed line with the much more flexible RRW, taking special care to avoid at-grade crossings, for which terraforming and short viaduct overpasses will be really useful. Of course, the simulation won't give this line the extra speed, but a clever design and stop arrangement could help a lot!