Real Highway (RHW) - Development and Support

[ashley123 2]

Erm a bit of help explaining this xD it doesnt seem to match up?

[MandelSoft 2,770]

1. Your overpass pieces are placed in the wrong direction; you put an offramp where an onramp should be and vice versa. Check the yellow lines: they should be facing the center of the freeway.

2. It's advised to uninstall your current Euro texture set, since the lane width doesn't match with the current RHW version.

[Wiimeiser 445]

Also the SPUI is a bit too wide and the middle section is glitching.

[ashley123 2]

i did place the offramp where the off ramp is meant to be. im using LHD so i dont know if its something to do with that?

[MandelSoft 2,770]

I did see that you were using LHD, but look closely at the wide shoulder lanes: they are facing the wrong way. They should point to the outside instead of the inside. This is the case in LHD as well as RHD. It's exactly the same.

[king_lek12 0]

hello, need help..

I recently installed the latest NAM but I just noticed that my existing RHW is not there anymore. It's just blank. I dunno what to do. Do I need to reinstall it? the one that I had was from May of 2010, I'm pretty sure its an old version, is there an update? thanks.

[Tarkus 6,932]

If it's not there anymore, it means it's been uninstalled.

There is a new RHW out (Version 5.0) that coincided with the new NAM release. I'd recommend picking it up.

-Tarkus

[ashley123 2]

its still the same, the onramp is the reverse direction to ground 6S.

[MandelSoft 2,770]

Switch them and you problem is solved...

[ashley123 2]

yes thats what i want to do but the problem is that the UDI will be one set of traffic coming one way and another set going the other and then yeah :L

Edit: don't worry :L i sorted it. i was kinna baffled xD

  Edited October 3, 2011 by CaptCity  
Merged posts.

[LivingInThePast 364]

I think the "broken single line" cosmetic piece for RHW-2 is indeed awesome, but I can't drag it in either direction, even though it looks like it should. Is this supposed to be this way, or a bug? I'd really want to be draggable.

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

I think the "broken single line" cosmetic piece for RHW-2 is indeed awesome, but I can't drag it in either direction, even though it looks like it should.

It isn't supposed to be draggable, nor is it supposed to be another starter-based network; It's just a puzzle piece that you plop on top of the RHW-2 in sequence.

[aaaling 83]

Will you consider making CPs like the ones below? It's the same as the RHW-2 Double Solid Line CP but for other networks. If you have this for RHW-8, then the crossover paths can be changed to allow passing on one side only like the RL function of these markings.

[ashley123 2]

Hey, these are really minor problems to me. i dont know if its just me but theses dont seem to work

1) A left hand version for the RHW cosmetics for RHW 10

2) HSR over RHW 10

im assuming the HSR isnt compatible witht he new RHW is it?

[Lucario Boricua 7,030]

Any progress with the draggabilization of orthogonal/diagonal and diagonal/diagonal over/underpasses? Especially RHW 4S and the MIS?

[Wiimeiser 445]

Remember the old SPUI piece? I want something that replicates the functionality of its MIS ramps, that is, in a LHD game cars can only make right turns...

[mnt5026 0]

I just built a few RHW's in my city. after speeding up time just for everything to adjust, all of the sudden I have no-job zots on about a fifth of my residential buildings. any explanations?

[Tarkus 6,932]

Hey, these are really minor problems to me. i dont know if its just me but theses dont seem to work

1) A left hand version for the RHW cosmetics for RHW 10

2) HSR over RHW 10

im assuming the HSR isnt compatible witht he new RHW is it?

1) Assuming you installed the Left-Hand Drive Plugin, there shouldn't be an issue with the Cosmetic Piece arrows--check to make sure all is in order on that front. We simply flipped the directionality of the texture for LHD, which (should have) automatically made them face the correct direction.

2) The HSRP is a relatively old component that, aside from one minor fix, has barely been touched in 3 1/2 years. Actually, there was some support for ERHW (and DDRHW) crossings over Ground HSR added in RHW Version 5.0, but many of the files involved with HSR-over-RHW are on the HSRP side and it'd require an update to the HSRP. The move to a "monolithic NAM" (in which there will be no separate RHW, HSRP, NWM, etc. anymore and everything will be contained in the NAM itself) may remove the stumbling blocks toward fixing some of these issues, but there's really not any developmental momentum behind HSRP.

Any progress with the draggabilization of orthogonal/diagonal and diagonal/diagonal over/underpasses? Especially RHW 4S and the MIS?

No progress at all, unfortunately. Because of how Maxis' Individual Network RULs handle same-network intersections involving diagonals, setting up overrides is a very, very messy task.

Remember the old SPUI piece? I want something that replicates the functionality of its MIS ramps, that is, in a LHD game cars can only make right turns...

Some sort of TuLEP sounds like it would do the job there.

I just built a few RHW's in my city. after speeding up time just for everything to adjust, all of the sudden I have no-job zots on about a fifth of my residential buildings. any explanations?

There could be any number of explanations for that:

1) Your RHW system is not set up correctly and contains some sort of unpassable point that is preventing vehicles from using it. This could include an overpass piece or ramp facing the wrong direction, or a neighbor connection issue (aside from the RHW-2, ERHW-2 and DDRHW-4 networks, RHW neighbor connections require some special construction techniques or else they will only allow freight truck traffic--see the Readme for more details).

2) You have a conflicting traffic simulator plugin installed that does not specify a speed for the RHW network, thus preventing it from working (examples of such Plugins include hailman's Variable Route Buses and the PEG-SPAM Traffic Plugin. (Does the Route Query show that traffic is using the RHW? Vehicles appearing to drive down it is not a reliable indicator of whether or not the highway is actually getting used.)

3) You recently changed traffic simulators and between that and the construction of a new RHW network it's taking some additional time to adjust. It may take up to 2 years in-game time for the game to fully recalibrate (esp. when the game is running on a higher play speed).

4) The no-job zots are being caused by something other than your recent construction of an RHW system.

-Tarkus

[Wiimeiser 445]

(aside from the RHW-2, ERHW-2 and DDRHW-4 networks, RHW neighbor connections require some special construction techniques or else they will only allow freight truck traffic--see the Readme for more details).

Technically the RHW3 and the median tile of the C-type networks would also allow non-freight traffic...

[2farnorth 26]

I've found a problem with the ERHW-4 connector piece.

When i try to plop it the road texture has been replaced with a multi-coloured pattern.

Has the texture accident been left out of the latest release or something?

Sorry i can't show a picture.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

^ This was a packaging error last summer. Download the package and reinstall it again.

[Gugu3 173]

Any progress with RHW bridges??I saw down at SC4D that shadow assassin did a great job on RHW6c bridge....

[Tarkus 6,932]

Any progress with RHW bridges??I saw down at SC4D that shadow assassin did a great job on RHW6c bridge....

There really isn't much new to report on the bridge front. We've got a bunch of partially complete stuff laying around, and no concrete plans as to its release yet.

A little update for our ST userbase on a couple of fronts.

Starting with NAM Version 31, we are anticipating a switch from the existing "modular NAM" paradigm to a "monolithic NAM". Under this new release architecture, all the current separate-download "NAM Components" (including the RHW, NWM, HSRP, SAM, RAM and RuRP--but not Additional Bridges or the DBE) will cease to exist as separate entities and will be merged into the NAM itself. In other words, instead of going and downloading the "RHW mod", you'd simply install the RHW through a checkbox in the NAM installer's "options" page.

After much discussion, analyzing user feedback and download statistics, we're planning to go this route for a number of reasons, which I'll highlight:

1) To simplify release engineering. The "modular NAM" was supposed to allow us to release components asynchronously from NAM Core updates using the NAM Essentials package to update the Controller. However, in the past 4 years, every single NAM component plugin release has coincided with a NAM Core update, rendering this concept moot.

2) To simplify interaction between various parts of the NAM and its components. Because of the proliferation of "crosslinks", where one NAM component intersects/crosses another (e.g. NWM/RAM crossings, RHW/HSRP crossings, etc.), file architecture and RUL encapsulation was getting messy. It will be easier to implement more items of this type in the future as a result, and put them in more intuitive places within the menu scheme.

3) To simplify tech support. The current "modular" paradigm creates the potential for "version mismatches" between NAM and Component Plugin releases--e.g. trying to run RHW Version 5.0 with NAM Version 28, or NWM Version 1.0 with NAM Version 30. The architecture of RUL Controller files does not permit these "mismatches" to work, and eliminating the separate-download component paradigm would make it far more difficult for them to occur at all.

4) Because users have asked for it. We've fielded many requests for a "NAM Mega Pack" over the years. This would essentially grant that long-sought request, and folks that didn't want the "full meal deal" could simply elect not to install the components they don't want/need just by unchecking boxes in the installer. Additionally, our download statistics have shown that more than half of all NAM Version 30 users also picked up RHW 5.0 and NWM 2.0.

5) The situation with filesizes has changed. The NAM Core (both Win and Mac) and the Mac version of the RHW already exceed the STEX's 20MB limit and are having to be hosted offsite at places where we can get away with files even larger than that without much difficulty.

Now, with respect to RHW development itself, there is a rather big change under way, codenamed "Project 0E". This project involves a ground-up refactoring of the RealHighway, with the intent of cleaning things up and removing some "idiosyncracies", with the goal of fostering "ultra-stabilization" and preparing things for the implementation of multi-height networking and modular stack interchange functionality.

Currently, it's in an early state, and the focus has been primarily on getting the Ground MIS Ramp code revamped (with a little bit done on L1 and L2 Elevated MIS).

As you can see in the image below, the "ultra-stabilization" is coming along swimmingly. While I doubt anyone will need to have a setup like this, the code can now handle it, whereas you'd deconvert to RHW-2 fairly quickly if you tried this with Version 5.0. (And yes, that Elevated MIS there is L1/7.5m high):

Because of the changes made as part of the Project 0E effort, it'll be possible to port what's done with the Ground MIS over to the other networks through a CPFR (Copy-Paste-Find-Replace) process and a few minor tweaks here and there as necessary.

RealHighway 5.0 will most likely be the last separate "RealHighway Mod" release. The Project 0E efforts are currently planned to form the "RealHighway Plugin" that will be part of the first "monolithic" release, NAM Version 31.

-Tarkus

[Jazzmaster 716]

Sounds awesome. The only disappointment I had with the latest NAM releases is some stability issues preventing me from doing everything I wanted to; I held no resentment, because I have a huge ambition, and I was getting a bit ahead of myself with all the new toys. But it's great to see you guys are going to take a new look at ultra stabilizing the RHW. Be a real treat to see the multi-height stuff, and I look forward to it.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Sounds like a massive task. I won't start eating garlic just yet (baited breath). I like the idea of a monolithic structure. Will you be able to do something similar for MAC users?

[Lucario Boricua 7,030]

We need to create a game company called "NAM City"--'nuff said.

[Will12 18]

Is it possible to have an entry/exit ramp that adds an extra lane to the RHW 6C to make an asymmetrical 6C/8C RHW. See picture below:

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

Is it possible to have an entry/exit ramp that adds an extra lane to the RHW 6C to make an asymmetrical 6C/8C RHW. See picture below:

Asymmetrical RHW-7C functionality has been around ever since the introduction of the RHW-8C. If you rotate the RHW-8C enough times, it becomes into an asymmetrical starter (7C).

Additionally, there are already ramps that fulfil what you're requesting: The RHW-8C D1, E1, and F1 ramps.

[Will12 18]

Is it possible to have an entry/exit ramp that adds an extra lane to the RHW 6C to make an asymmetrical 6C/8C RHW. See picture below:

Asymmetrical RHW-7C functionality has been around ever since the introduction of the RHW-8C. If you rotate the RHW-8C enough times, it becomes into an asymmetrical starter (7C).

Additionally, there are already ramps that fulfil what you're requesting: The RHW-8C D1, E1, and F1 ramps.

Thanks Ganaram my computer with sc4 on it has died on me and is getting repaired so i cant go on sc4 to check these things out. I'm in the process of getting this old lump of machinery (LOL )to play it but its gonna be a while!

Are there overpass pieces for the 6C/8C RHW?

  Edited November 6, 2011 by Will12  

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

Are there overpass pieces for the 6C/8C RHW?

Short answer: If you mean 7C overpass pieces, no, unfortunately.

  Edited November 6, 2011 by Ganaram DI