Slopes, my biggest frustration in SC4, and how I hope SC5 will be different

[tSlater 134]

Slopes. They're beautiful, make for interesting cityscapes and planning. I loved building cities up the hills in Sim City 2000, or in valleys. But SC4 made me hate them.

For one, slopes in Sim City 4 were even more beautiful due to their much more natural approach. They weren't terraces like in SC2k, but actual slopes. However, the rest of the game's features felt like they weren't designed for slopes at all. Sure, there were some buildings that had slope-conforming lots.. with awkward 40-ft-on-one-corner stilted buildings sitting in the middle. Then there were the non-slope-conforming lots, from which a parking lot entrance would open right onto a 60ft retaining wall to the sidewalk. To be honest, I'm not sure such can truly ever be fixed considering the nature of pre-designed buildings, but it certainly can be avoided to a great degree by reducing the emphasis of the slopes. And with the game in full 3d, slopes won't need to be as exaggerated as they were in SC4.

But that wasn't my biggest frustration. Small, gradual hills still worked relatively nicely, and made for nice small towns. The biggest frustration in the game was when that small town on that very slight, gradual slope grew into a big city and needed large upgrades to transit infrastructure. Or even when I used the levelling tool to force an area to be flat, and accidentally made a section of the city some non-visible half a metre lower than the rest:

"CANNOT LEVEL TERRAIN TO BUILD NETWORK."

Hnnnng. This is my most hated message to see in any game. It makes me burn with a seething hatred and frustration as I then spend hours trying to figure out how to make the ground level in that one spot without obliterating entire city blocks simply because that railroad track 4 feet away is a mere centimetre lower the the road 15 feet away. If computers had emotion detection, mine would surely shut itself off to slink away from my cussing it out as I try to make my transit networks actually connect over some 1° slope. Even as much as I love the idea of curvy roads, if I had to choose between the absolute removal of this annoyance and curvy roads, I'd forego the curvy roads and take the peace and solitude of being able to build networks at varying elevations right next to each other. That is how much this element of Sim City 4 annoyed me.

So how can Sim City 5 / Sim City 2013 / Sim City Whatever-the-Llama be different? I see multiple ways. For one, it does not appear to be tile based anymore. Hopefully, roads and networks can become relatively slope-conforming in terms of cross-ways, for very minor slopes. And a small distance of what would have been less than a tile -- the distance between that road and that train track -- can perhaps slope as needed for whatever network is beside it. The other option, for more dramatic slopes, is to bring back the retaining wall we saw in SC2k for transit networks. Yes, I went on a short diatribe about retaining walls for lots and buildings. Those were awkward. But for transportation networks, retaining walls work.

So please, whichever Maxis employee might possibly read this if ever, let it be known this incredible frustration and the hope for a better tomorrow in landscaped slopes. And please, fellow Simtropians, let us vent our frustrations and explore other possible solutions and hopes for slopes in the next Sim City.

[Paulobergonci 673]

i was thinking the same thing. I would like a slope tool, like the Slope Mod, and we could choose the degree of the slope. Not like Cities XL, it was ugly and unrealistic.

Also, i wish that we could build tunnels on land close to sea level, like in New York, that has the subway, because in SC4 we coudnt do that.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Actually what is needed is a better set of civil engineering tools. Up, down and flat is not enough. I know they can be made incremental, but what I want is the ability to mark a few points and then tell the game to make the landscape conform to a grade of 'x'. For rights of way, and automatic cut system would be good to create highway/railway cuts, with an option to create a tunnel instead. There are times when I want my tracks exposed in a cut and allowed to be bridged over. Too many handsprings are required to do this in SC4.

[WhereisSC5? 20]

I personally think that transport networks should only confirm to slopes of the smallest degree. Otherwise, they will be built in either underground or elevated networks. Elevation should also be completely adjustable.

[Mark Waybill 242]

I hope we will be able to build realistic gradients for roads and rail, with an option for cuttings/tunnels/bridges/viaducts etc. As for buildings one hopes they have improved on the old retaining wall system.

[DazzaDazza 29]

I agree with all of the above,

also being able to changing the slop without destroying every thing around it

[Hiramas 4]

I agree with all of the above,

also being able to changing the slop without destroying every thing around it

This.

I actually hate it if I build something and then try to adjust some not seen before hill and everything goes boom.

If I have an elevated road and I raise the land beneath, make the land fit to that road and make the adjustment stop when the road is reached.

Simple as that.

[squeaky024 14]

I would definitely add that there should be a way to stop buildings from going boom from one stray click of the terraform tools. Perhaps buildings should be locked from deletion and can only be removed by bulldozing. This way when grading terrain near a dense city you don't displace 3000 sims living in the nearby 3 buildings because you wanted to move one mound of dirt somewhere else. Roads and freeways should also be able to stay on the terrain as you terraform it, so if you pave over a bit of ground and you notice its a bit wavy, you should be able to make small adjustments to slope it better, or provide sloping tools so this wont be needed in the first place. Clearing a path for a dual carriage freeway with a median should not be so hard and require 3 tools to grade properly into a decent slope.

Bridges over land and tunnels under water too please, and curvy

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

I am of the opinion, along with everyone else I think, that force 8 earthquakes caused by terraforming and edge reconciliation are clearly not smart. Building a road should use grade up or cut as needed. If you are building a road over a major landscape feature, there should be options to either grade it properly or make a cut whichever seems best. Tunneling should be an option, not a default. I often want to see my network on the surface and not a couple of cop-out tunnel entrances.

If I have a tunnel, I want to be able to view it using an underground camera. I want subway stations that really are, and that can have tuck shops and other stores associated with them. I want underground malls that lead to or have subway stations inside. I also want at grade light rail so that if I want to continue my subway out of doors this is possible. It can be in a cut or on the graded surface. Anyone who has been to Montreal, Toronto or Moscow in particular knows that subway stations and associated malls can be works of art.

[Catmando 7]

I want subway stations that really are, and that can have tuck shops and other stores associated with them. I want underground malls that lead to or have subway stations inside. I also want at grade light rail so that if I want to continue my subway out of doors this is possible. It can be in a cut or on the graded surface. Anyone who has been to Montreal, Toronto or Moscow in particular knows that subway stations and associated malls can be works of art.

I think suggestions like this are the tip of the iceberg to an underlying idea: having several default levels of a city for building. There's ground level of course, but how about a default level for building underground malls? I know there's some custom content in SC4 that lets us do that, but it's more a workaround than anything. In this first underground level road underpasses and tunnels could go as well. In a level under that could run water, sewer, etc. Finally, in a level under that could run subways.

Above the ground we have the default elevated rail level, but why not expand on that? Let that be a default level for elevated highways, road overpasses, and so on. Above that could run high speed rail, monorail, and ungodly high highways, the kind of thing we sometimes seen in really awful interchanges like these:

With a few default levels I think we could avoid situations like "Shoot, my highway is going to be four meters too tall when it reaches this other one!" and "Gotta tweak this overpass just right, juuust right...."

[Mark Waybill 242]

Well Maxis said the interiors of buildings will not actually be modelled, but will apear to exist from without by using some clever code, which means we won't be able to go inside structures. As to underground railways etc, I'd like it if we could view them from within, but I don't know if we will be able to.

[Catmando 7]

Well Maxis said the interiors of buildings will not actually be modelled, but will apear to exist from without by using some clever code, which means we won't be able to go inside structures. As to underground railways etc, I'd like it if we could view them from within, but I don't know if we will be able to.

Well, my guess is that tunnels and underground rail and whatnot will act like interiors, but it's hard to tell so early in development and with so little information about this stuff. Besides, I don't mind if we can't actually go underground and fly around inside the subways or something or if our view of the "underground malls" are only fake. I still think it would be better aesthetically if we had them than if we didn't, and it would be more realistic.