SimCity: Transit and Roading Networks

[Mark Waybill 242]

Yes, I wouldn't mind a bit of Maxis Humour (possibly toggleable realism settings if I wished to make a serious version of a real city but in most cases fine) and naturally it would be very dull if everyone did exactly the same thing. But also if I create a university town I don't expect everyone to act like a farmer, and vice versa with a rural town.

If tilesets/timelines involve all aspects of the simulation from the building architecture to peoples way of dress it will take a lot longer than with good old SCURK to make a tileset. I should imagine entire teams would be needed

[flowmotion 24]

I certainly like the idea of traffic jams caused by crazy old men riding llamas

It could even be a gameplay thing - e.g. if you don't have enough parks, the kids open the fire hydrants and play baseball in the street. All kinds of cool stuff could happen, depending how much detail they put into modeling each individual sim's daily behavior.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

^ I think we have drifted rather far afield from the topic title. What does simulating individuals have to do with Transit and Roading?

[Catmando 7]

^ I think we have drifted rather far afield from the topic title. What does simulating individuals have to do with Transit and Roading?

Simulating transit is just a part of simulating a sim's behavior as a whole. I think we just got a bit too general. Of course, at this point I don't think there's much to discuss. I have a feeling we're going to be reduced to polls and wishlists for the next twelve months.

Might as well start early. Fellow Simtropolians, which do you value more: a few highly customizable transportation choices (e.g. roads, highways, and rails, with variable lanes, customizable intersections, changing speed limits, restricting traffic type choices available, etc.), or a large variety of relatively unchangeable transit options (e.g. walking paths, bike paths, streets, roads, country roads, avenues, boulevards (they're specifically tree-lined, if I remember correctly), one-ways, highways, elevated highways, trams, rails, elevated rails, and so on ad infinitum)?

  Edited March 18, 2012 by Catmando  

[Mark Waybill 242]

If I had to choose i'd pick options. I'd love to see trams in my cities, and bike paths and so forth, especially if they all had the same curving ability, realistic gradients (which do to an extent apply to roads as well as railways just less necessary, especially for less important roads) diagonal bridges, overpasses etc.

However naturally ideally we'd have both, so we could have single or double track tramways/railways, ferries with multiple berth types, various airport modules etc

[Frode789 70]

^ I think we have drifted rather far afield from the topic title. What does simulating individuals have to do with Transit and Roading?

Simulating transit is just a part of simulating a sim's behavior as a whole. I think we just got a bit too general. Of course, at this point I don't think there's much to discuss. I have a feeling we're going to be reduced to polls and wishlists for the next twelve months.

Might as well start early. Fellow Simtropolians, which do you value more: highly customizable roads (e.g. variable lanes, customizable intersections, changing speed limits, restricting traffic type, etc.) and avenues and such, or a large variety of relatively unchangeable transit options (e.g. walking paths, bike paths, streets, roads, country roads, avenues, boulevards (they're specifically tree-lined, if I remember correctly), one-ways, highways, elevated highways, trams, rails, elevated rails, and so on ad infinitum)?

The first one + highway customization + rails.

[Catmando 7]

The first one + highway customization + rails.

I changed my wording a bit to account for this. Roads, highways, and rails are pretty much the basis of Simcity's transportation, excluding things like seaports and airports (and spaceports, I guess—all of them are structured quite a bit differently).

[Cob92 360]

^ I think we have drifted rather far afield from the topic title. What does simulating individuals have to do with Transit and Roading?

Simulating transit is just a part of simulating a sim's behavior as a whole. I think we just got a bit too general. Of course, at this point I don't think there's much to discuss. I have a feeling we're going to be reduced to polls and wishlists for the next twelve months.

Might as well start early. Fellow Simtropolians, which do you value more: a few highly customizable transportation choices (e.g. roads, highways, and rails, with variable lanes, customizable intersections, changing speed limits, restricting traffic type choices available, etc.), or a large variety of relatively unchangeable transit options (e.g. walking paths, bike paths, streets, roads, country roads, avenues, boulevards (they're specifically tree-lined, if I remember correctly), one-ways, highways, elevated highways, trams, rails, elevated rails, and so on ad infinitum)?

I vote for having just a few customizable networks. We should have surface roads, freeways + ramps, heavy rail, and light rail. The player should be able to customize the number of lanes (adding extra ped lanes widens the sidewalk, and the possibility to have only ped lanes or car lanes would exist), the speed of the road, and raise or lower its priority level. Changing these properties would have effects on capacity, travel times, desirability along the network, the preference for various types of transport along the network, and how the network behaves when it meets another network. Two roads of the same priority would form a regulated intersection; the higher the priority the more complex the intersection (for example, level 1 roads would just have stop signs, level 2 would have simple stoplights, level 3 would have stoplights and left turn lanes, and level 4 would have two left turn lanes plus slip roads, all controlled by stoplights). Ramps would be built just like any other road; the player drags the ramp from the highway to the surface road at the desired angle. It may sound like a complex system, but the reality is that there would only be these 3 properties for any network, and unless you want to micromanage, building your roads would simply be a matter of slapping stuff down and cranking up the properties until traffic clears up.

[Mark Waybill 242]

Ah but there are also toll booths, car parks, etc to consider. I think with the modular system it may be possible to do a lot more than just decide how many lanes will exist. Not necessarily micromanaging (I.E not necessarily changing the speed limits in certain areas, which would be done automatically I should think) but for instance the building of railyards etc that would exist in reality should be a necessary option, otherwise the whole Glassbox system would be limited in realism. Trains need a place to be housed and maintained etc.

[Gizmo4life 3]

I vote for having just a few customizable networks. We should have surface roads, freeways + ramps, heavy rail, and light rail. The player should be able to customize the number of lanes (adding extra ped lanes widens the sidewalk, and the possibility to have only ped lanes or car lanes would exist), the speed of the road, and raise or lower its priority level. Changing these properties would have effects on capacity, travel times, desirability along the network, the preference for various types of transport along the network, and how the network behaves when it meets another network. Two roads of the same priority would form a regulated intersection; the higher the priority the more complex the intersection (for example, level 1 roads would just have stop signs, level 2 would have simple stoplights, level 3 would have stoplights and left turn lanes, and level 4 would have two left turn lanes plus slip roads, all controlled by stoplights). Ramps would be built just like any other road; the player drags the ramp from the highway to the surface road at the desired angle. It may sound like a complex system, but the reality is that there would only be these 3 properties for any network, and unless you want to micromanage, building your roads would simply be a matter of slapping stuff down and cranking up the properties until traffic clears up.

I hope to see a 4th property of grade, so that any network type can be elevated or put underground. I would also like to see parking taken into account in a more realistic way, there is no logic to the grown parking lots in simcity 4 cities making the parking structure placement somewhat arbitrary as opposed to in response to an actual lack of parking.

[z1 566]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it did sound like they were modeling each individual sim for employment purposes (unlike SC4 which did it statistically). So, in theory, the simulation knows the exact age, education level, and perhaps gender of each person living in a building.

Sims are modeled individually in SC4 as well, with the game's knowing the exact age, education level, and wealth level of each one.

^ I think we have drifted rather far afield from the topic title. What does simulating individuals have to do with Transit and Roading?

In SC4 at least, wealth levels help determine whether cars or mass transit are used getting to work. Age determines whether the Sims go to work at all, which obviously has a huge effect on transit. And education level and wealth level determine what kind of jobs they're suitable for, which in turn determines traffic patterns.

  Edited March 19, 2012 by z1  

[gweed123 33]

What I would like to see is 3 different complexity (not difficulty) settings. The first would be a Beginner level. It would have basic road and rail infrastructure, 1 option for highways, no options for customizing roadways, etc. The budgeting process would also be simplified as well, as would the zoning categories. Basically, it would be SimCity for the new guy. If this whole "finite resources" thing is implemented too, maybe only include in the Intermediate and Expert levels.

The Intermediate level would introduce some additional complexities, like some more road, rail, and highway options. The budgeting process would also become more complex. There would also be some new zoning categories introduced, like mixed use.

The Expert level would be a fully customizable transit experience. You can choose how many lanes you want your roads and highways to be. You can choose if you want to have HOV or BRT lanes. You can actually plan the subway routes in addition to laying down the tracks. You can have more detailed zoning based on density and unit type (i.e. instead of zoning "low density", you can specify just single family, just townhouses, etc).

I say all of this because Maxis has made it quite clear that they want to strike a balance between appeasing the hardcore SimCity people, as well as attracting new people to the franchise. I say: why compromise? The complexity of the game can be driven by what mode you want to play it in. If you're new, play in Beginner mode, and then when you want to be challenged, move on up. For those who want as realistic of a simulation as possible, we can play on Expert mode and get access to a whole array of customizing features that would leave the beginner's head spinning.

[Catmando 7]

What I would like to see is 3 different complexity (not difficulty) settings. The first would be a Beginner level. It would have basic road and rail infrastructure, 1 option for highways, no options for customizing roadways, etc. The budgeting process would also be simplified as well, as would the zoning categories. Basically, it would be SimCity for the new guy. If this whole "finite resources" thing is implemented too, maybe only include in the Intermediate and Expert levels.

The Intermediate level would introduce some additional complexities, like some more road, rail, and highway options. The budgeting process would also become more complex. There would also be some new zoning categories introduced, like mixed use.

The Expert level would be a fully customizable transit experience. You can choose how many lanes you want your roads and highways to be. You can choose if you want to have HOV or BRT lanes. You can actually plan the subway routes in addition to laying down the tracks. You can have more detailed zoning based on density and unit type (i.e. instead of zoning "low density", you can specify just single family, just townhouses, etc).

I say all of this because Maxis has made it quite clear that they want to strike a balance between appeasing the hardcore SimCity people, as well as attracting new people to the franchise. I say: why compromise? The complexity of the game can be driven by what mode you want to play it in. If you're new, play in Beginner mode, and then when you want to be challenged, move on up. For those who want as realistic of a simulation as possible, we can play on Expert mode and get access to a whole array of customizing features that would leave the beginner's head spinning.

I've considered ideas like this before, but I have reservations. I don't want to keep my city locked in the "simple" setting for its entire life. I would prefer at least being able to move freely between the levels. I realize this could be abused, though, and I'm not sure how it would work if, say, the number of types of resources in your city gets changed, although I think problems with that could probably be solved. I'm also interested in the method Synekism used. They had a secondary menu that could be opened called "sampi," named after the Greek letter. It had more complex options that aren't originally visible. The menu's options can be changed freely, assuming the players care to, but it's inconspicuous enough so as not to distract more casual players who don't care about stuff like that.

[Mark Waybill 242]

They will probably have a tutorial region or a guide or both I should think for most areas of city building.

If I had to chooce between simplicity and complexity of transport options I would choose complexity, but a lot of the micromanagement can be done automatically by the Roads Department Advisor's team, or a private company or what have you, with you giving the basic commands.

[Lantentine 4]

One of the biggest things I want to see in Simcity is relatively 'late game' (obviously it can't be late game because it's a sandbox - but I mean after many hours of hard work and good planning) transit options, such as very efficient, visually attractive and comfortable (Sims like it!) mag-lev / anti-gravity train but which costs a vast, vast amount of money. Or perhaps you can steadily upgrade your road network to be computerised so all cars travel in 'herds' and traffic is greatly reduced, etc.

[Mark Waybill 242]

I don't know about computerised cars, which sounds very boring and un Maxis like, but mag lev trains are an idea. They are real, so while common use would be a futuristic thing, I see no reason why we shouldn't have them. I remember first learning about them in Newton Graphic Science Magazine when I was about eight, I was quite fascinated by the concept. They could be on ground, overground or underground. Cost I would agree would be high, although I don't know whether actual operational cost would be as problematic as construction cost.

[Cob92 360]

I vote for having just a few customizable networks. We should have surface roads, freeways + ramps, heavy rail, and light rail. The player should be able to customize the number of lanes (adding extra ped lanes widens the sidewalk, and the possibility to have only ped lanes or car lanes would exist), the speed of the road, and raise or lower its priority level. Changing these properties would have effects on capacity, travel times, desirability along the network, the preference for various types of transport along the network, and how the network behaves when it meets another network. Two roads of the same priority would form a regulated intersection; the higher the priority the more complex the intersection (for example, level 1 roads would just have stop signs, level 2 would have simple stoplights, level 3 would have stoplights and left turn lanes, and level 4 would have two left turn lanes plus slip roads, all controlled by stoplights). Ramps would be built just like any other road; the player drags the ramp from the highway to the surface road at the desired angle. It may sound like a complex system, but the reality is that there would only be these 3 properties for any network, and unless you want to micromanage, building your roads would simply be a matter of slapping stuff down and cranking up the properties until traffic clears up.

I hope to see a 4th property of grade, so that any network type can be elevated or put underground. I would also like to see parking taken into account in a more realistic way, there is no logic to the grown parking lots in simcity 4 cities making the parking structure placement somewhat arbitrary as opposed to in response to an actual lack of parking.

Well, I was thinking of having the roads built in a manner similar to Cities XL, so there is no distinction between an elevated, ground-level, or underground network beyond its position in 3D space. As for parking, city ordinances should handle that. For example, Houston requires businesses to provide parking, so there will be parking lots even beyond the basic need for them. In addition, with the heavy use of automobiles in American society, businesses see it as being in their best interest to construct parking lots on their property so that customers can access them more easily. In game, high land values should translate to fewer parking lots being constructed or more parking garages being set up, and building a public parking garage or passing a city ordinance for streetside parking would mean that homes/businesses within X distance of the lot would no longer need to construct private parking. Also, the frequency and size of parking lot construction should be affected by the level of car traffic in the city relative to the level of pedestrian traffic; cities that are more walking oriented may not need fields of parking around every building.

[ggaleazz 1]

What I would like to see is 3 different complexity (not difficulty) settings. The first would be a Beginner level. It would have basic road and rail infrastructure, 1 option for highways, no options for customizing roadways, etc. The budgeting process would also be simplified as well, as would the zoning categories. Basically, it would be SimCity for the new guy. If this whole "finite resources" thing is implemented too, maybe only include in the Intermediate and Expert levels.

The Intermediate level would introduce some additional complexities, like some more road, rail, and highway options. The budgeting process would also become more complex. There would also be some new zoning categories introduced, like mixed use.

The Expert level would be a fully customizable transit experience. You can choose how many lanes you want your roads and highways to be. You can choose if you want to have HOV or BRT lanes. You can actually plan the subway routes in addition to laying down the tracks. You can have more detailed zoning based on density and unit type (i.e. instead of zoning "low density", you can specify just single family, just townhouses, etc).

I say all of this because Maxis has made it quite clear that they want to strike a balance between appeasing the hardcore SimCity people, as well as attracting new people to the franchise. I say: why compromise? The complexity of the game can be driven by what mode you want to play it in. If you're new, play in Beginner mode, and then when you want to be challenged, move on up. For those who want as realistic of a simulation as possible, we can play on Expert mode and get access to a whole array of customizing features that would leave the beginner's head spinning.

Gweed from UT???

[gweed123 33]

Gweed from UT???

Indeed, haha. I enjoy real-life transit planning as well as SimCity transit planning!

  Edited March 21, 2012 by Blue Lightning  
Fixed your quote :)

[jacksunny 741]

So we've been discussing the option of having only one road icon in the transit menu, and then we can edit all aspects of it after placing it, how about before? When the road icon is clicked, a wizard will pop up (not literally) that will allow you to edit the road. After pressing "OK", you will be able to build the custom road.

[ggaleazz 1]

So we've been discussing the option of having only one road icon in the transit menu, and then we can edit all aspects of it after placing it, how about before? When the road icon is clicked, a wizard will pop up (not literally) that will allow you to edit the road. After pressing "OK", you will be able to build the custom road.

Hmm interesting idea. I pitched the idea of evolving roads in another thread whyby the road automatically (or prompts the user to do so) adjusts the type of road to the traffic on it. Essentially removing the need to repave streets over into roads and destroying part of your city to turn a road into an avenue. Natural progressions like this happen seamlessly in real life and should (could?) be represented the same way by the simulator.

[Durfsurn 539]

I think Maxis needs to make the car parks of building multi level etc. auto connect to the adjacent street/road.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

So we've been discussing the option of having only one road icon in the transit menu, and then we can edit all aspects of it after placing it, how about before? When the road icon is clicked, a wizard will pop up (not literally) that will allow you to edit the road. After pressing "OK", you will be able to build the custom road.

Hmm interesting idea. I pitched the idea of evolving roads in another thread whyby the road automatically (or prompts the user to do so) adjusts the type of road to the traffic on it. Essentially removing the need to repave streets over into roads and destroying part of your city to turn a road into an avenue. Natural progressions like this happen seamlessly in real life and should (could?) be represented the same way by the simulator.

I'd like to expand on this idea just a little. Suppose you create one of these road profiles then could store it in the menu for future use? This would customize the menu with things you wanted. Of course, you should also be able to delete stuff you no longer want. Whether this would be an individual menu or a global one is an argument for the multi-player discussion.

[jacksunny 741]

^I like that idea as well.

[gweed123 33]

I'd like to expand on this idea just a little. Suppose you create one of these road profiles then could store it in the menu for future use? This would customize the menu with things you wanted. Of course, you should also be able to delete stuff you no longer want. Whether this would be an individual menu or a global one is an argument for the multi-player discussion.

I'd like to see two basic options:

1) Lay down a road (with sub menus for each of the road types, as well as a customize option for non-standard road types).

or

2) The option to lay down a road right-of-way. This would be particularly useful if you know that you're eventually going to widen the road out to an avenue, but you don't have the money or the traffic to justify it. If you have a 2 lane road in a 2 tile ROW, the road would centre itself within the ROW, with grass on either side. When you're ready, you can drag an avenue over the ROW, and not have to rip out everything on 1 side of the street.

That may be a bit more complicated, but as long as they keep the simple way of laying down roads, I think it would be fine.

The ROW tool would also be very useful if you're developing a lot and concession system, but don't want to have roads out in the middle of nowhere (i.e. if you just want to pace it out, and reserve that land for future use).

[tSlater 134]

Yes, yes, and a million times yes on the ROW idea. I don't really expect them to implement a full in-depth road customisation tool, after all it needs to be approachable by more casual players too. I expect that's something the mod community would take care of with time. But the ability to create ROWs with roads in them with the ROWs not necessarily linked to the current road size is extremely powerful for very little complication.

[Wiimeiser 452]

I think roads should have a Height/Lanes tab resembling the Pool Corners panel from The Sims 3, if the new game is using an even remotely similar interface...

[Catmando 7]

I'd like to expand on this idea just a little. Suppose you create one of these road profiles then could store it in the menu for future use? This would customize the menu with things you wanted. Of course, you should also be able to delete stuff you no longer want. Whether this would be an individual menu or a global one is an argument for the multi-player discussion.

Let's expand on this even further. Don't just give us one road as a template, give us a half-dozen or so, akin to the ones in Simcity 4: street, road, avenue, highway, etc. Left click to select one and use on the fly, as a lot of casual users might do, or right click to edit the properties, with the option to save as a new type. If a lot of options are available this should probably work hand in hand with the idea of custom-made menus discussed in another thread.

  Edited March 23, 2012 by Catmando  

[Helbore 15]

I'd like to expand on this idea just a little. Suppose you create one of these road profiles then could store it in the menu for future use? This would customize the menu with things you wanted. Of course, you should also be able to delete stuff you no longer want. Whether this would be an individual menu or a global one is an argument for the multi-player discussion.

Let's expand on this even further. Don't just give us one road as a template, give us a half-dozen or so, akin to the ones in Simcity 4: street, road, avenue, highway, etc. Left click to select one and use on the fly, as a lot of casual users might do, or right click to edit the properties, with the option to save as a new type. If a lot of options are available this should probably work hand in hand with the idea of custom-made menus discussed in another thread.

I've wanted this in Sim City 4 for years! It makes perfect sense as it gives a complex, flexible tool for the enthusiasts, but allows Maxis to create simple templates to avoid overwhelming the newbies. It also means that it should be straightforward for players to slowly move up to more complex gameplay as they feel comfortable. No changing modes or difficulty settings - just make use of the default templates until you feel ready to dive into the "custom" menu.

They could even tailor it further, with the custom menu having a basic view on display by default and an advanced button to bring up even more options. eg. the simple menu would just have number of lanes, lane type, whether there is a median, surface type (eg. dirt track, concrete or asphalt/tarmac) and elevation as its options, whereas the advanced menu would open up additional options for width of lanes, traffic restrictions (carpool lanes, bike lanes, bus lanes, etc), speed limits, width of medians, further surface options (eg. cobblestone), etc.

This way you make a complex system with a structure that allows you gradual access to the more complex features. IT means we get all the funky stuff we want and new users don't run away screaming the first time they see the menu!

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

This is very nice, and I like it. However, let us say that it will be for a future release, and simply ask that the hooks be placed in the initial game so that this could be an expansion pack at a later time. I think we want this game to be released sooner rather than later.

The new pack could be something called, for example, 'Roads in SimCity'.