NAM: Development

[Fantozzi 4,067]

My Friends, the end is near!

The end of puzzling networks together. You may have grown up this way like you've grown up in the believe the world is a sphere.

But your children will be different. They will paint their networks on naked ground.

Hear my words! They will paint their highways like Caravaggio used to paint on canvas.

And they will see - the world is not a sphere but a dented clump of mud, holded together by asphalt.

[rsc204 21,805]

18 hours ago, velrox said:

will elevated highway FAR pieces will be added or it is not possible?

There are no plans that I know of to add them.

In theory, it only requires raising the models and adding some supports, similar story with the paths, no big deal there. I agree too it's an overlooked feature really. The issue is that these are puzzle pieces, something we really try to avoid adding these days, but frankly I can't think of another good way to include them. At that point, my knowledge of how to do it falls down, otherwise I'd be interested in trying to include them.

[Tarkus 6,932]

Thanks for all the kind words on the MHO DRIs!

To follow up on the Elevated MHO Fractional Angle functionality, right now, the most likely thing I'd see happening there with the implementation is to use a FLEX Piece, which would allow some rather cool additional features to enter the equation as well.  memo did attempt a draggable version of the Fractional Angle Avenues at one point, when he was designing the draggable implementation we now use for the Road version, but he came to the conclusion that it was too unwieldy, and didn't pursue it any further as a result. 

I do have a potential idea for a different way of doing a draggable implementation for the multi-tile Maxis base networks, but it's still in the theoretical stage.  I won't know if it's viable until I attempt it.

-Tarkus

[velrox 39]

will we have ramps turned at a FAR angle, roads intersecting a FAR piece? and diagonal ramps on highways? we have on classic Maxis highways, but there's none on maxis highway override.

[Tarkus 6,932]

The idea of doing a FLEX implementation on FA MHO would indeed be with the intent of allowing under/overcrossings.  Ramps off of diagonal MHO and (more) off of RHW are planned, but particularly with MHO and elevated RHW networks, it's going to require modeling work, which tends to cause that functionality to lag quite a bit in the development queue. 

Regarding the "ramps turned at a FAR angle", if you're referring to FA ramps branching off of a standard orthogonal MHO, it's the same answer as with the ramps off of diagonal MHO.  If you're referring to ramps branching off of an FA MHO, however, that's pretty deep down the rabbit hole, and hasn't really even entered planning stages on the RHW end, even for ground-level networks.

Now, for something else fun . . . don't know when this will be coming, but stay tuned . . .

-Tarkus

[velrox 39]

@Tarkus how come cars are supposed to get on southbound from eastbound or northbound from westbound when there's only 2 straight arrows?

Spoiler

and to make SC4 as realistic as possible, can we have elevated streets? FAR streets? elevated roads? avenues? highways? one-ways? streets? over a FAR piece?

 

[bladeberkman 714]

Is that a flex turn lane directly under a RHW overpass?  

[rsc204 21,805]

1 hour ago, velrox said:

and to make SC4 as realistic as possible, can we have elevated streets? FAR streets? elevated roads? avenues? highways? one-ways? streets? over a FAR piece?

Elevated streets make no sense, we have elevated roads, better to use them instead. Each such option takes time, we have to prioritise functionality being added. FAR streets would be nice, but I don't know of current plans to add them. It's made more difficult I suspect because Streets don't by default support diagonals. So finding patterns that don't conflict with other setups is more complex than the Road network.

Elevated networks over FAR are possible, I do believe Eggman made some prototypes, I'm sure such things will happen eventually. Again is the problem that everything has to be made and coded. The NAM team is pretty small right now and so progress is slow. I could list 150 things that are on our list of things to do, we've enough to keep us busy for a long time. So whilst it never hurts to hear what people want, just bear in mind we can't do everything at once.

[Tarkus 6,932]

5 hours ago, velrox said:

@Tarkus how come cars are supposed to get on southbound from eastbound or northbound from westbound when there's only 2 straight arrows?

Because modding at 4:15am.   Now that I've had some rest . . .

And yes, @bladeberkman, those are indeed FTLs under the RHW there.  These "dual-sided" setups were designed specifically for this sort of situation, and are the first you'll see that can do this.

-Tarkus

 

[rsc204 21,805]

2 hours ago, Tarkus said:

Because modding at 4:15am.   Now that I've had some rest . . .

I know that feeling all too well. It's not a hobby, it's an addiction .

[Eggman121 1,035]

36 minutes ago, rsc204 said:

I know that feeling all too well. It's not a hobby, it's an addiction .

Too true. Just don't get burnt out.

NAM 37 is going to have a few neat features. I am currently working on some stuff to enhance the RHW as well as the up and coming REW

-eggman121 (NAM Team Member)

[Tarkus 6,932]

Thanks for all the likes and kind words!

Doing this a half-hour earlier makes all the difference in the world.



You can probably guess what's coming next . . .

-Tarkus

[velrox 39]

what we will do if an ave-6 intersects this same intersection? maybe it will be an unreleased network under the overpass?

[APSMS 1,892]

Clearly NWM support and 220 FTLs are next in order

[Tarkus 6,932]

Decided to go straight for the jugular . . . the not-yet-released Type 230 setups.   (Sorry--the color correction got away from me a little on the MIS turn lane setup here).

-Tarkus

[velrox 39]

"how about the type 220 setups?"

[Tarkus 6,932]

12 minutes ago, velrox said:

"how about the type 220 setups?"

I've yet to determine a good configuration for Type 220, so it's on hold for the moment.  The base Type 220 is a dual-tile setup with 6 total lanes, while the dual-sided Type 220 would entail a total of 8 lanes, which is in triple-tile territory (squeezing 8 lanes onto a dual-tile is not an appealing option). 

-Tarkus

[jeffryfisher 2,176]

2 hours ago, Tarkus said:

squeezing 8 lanes onto a dual-tile is not an appealing option

12.5' wide lanes aren't wide enough for today's SUVs?

[velrox 39]

3 hours ago, Tarkus said:

I've yet to determine a good configuration for Type 220, so it's on hold for the moment.  The base Type 220 is a dual-tile setup with 6 total lanes, while the dual-sided Type 220 would entail a total of 8 lanes, which is in triple-tile territory (squeezing 8 lanes onto a dual-tile is not an appealing option). 

-Tarkus

"have you tried making an RD-6 with the left inner lanes turn left and centers straight-left?"

[Tarkus 6,932]

8 hours ago, jeffryfisher said:

12.5' wide lanes aren't wide enough for today's SUVs?

It'd be more in the range of 10' if you crammed eight lanes onto two tiles.  Granted, that's the same as the NRD-4, but I'm not particularly keen on seeing that footprint proliferate.

7 hours ago, velrox said:

"have you tried making an RD-6 with the left inner lanes turn left and centers straight-left?"

That wouldn't be a Dual Type 220 at that point . . . it'd be a Dual Type 120 with an option lane.  The through-left option is something under consideration for the base Type 120 setups, but that's a whole other can of worms.  I'm not trying to exhaust all the possibilities with this particular project just yet (these are actually FLEX-based pre-fabs).

-Tarkus

[Tarkus 6,932]

Thus far, I've completed texture color correction, T21 work, and all pathing except for the transition in/out of the Dual Type 230.  I've also been experimenting with a redesign on the Type A2 ramps, such that the entrance tapers to a single lane before entering the highway, alleviating a common complaint about that ramp's design.

Here's a wider overview of the whole thing:



And up close and personal with the signalized intersection:



-Tarkus

[bladeberkman 714]

Wow, this is so cool. The tapered ramp looks great, too. Does the flex ramp/flex intersection combination come as a package deal? Or could a parallel frontage network run through the flex intersections, too? 

[Tarkus 6,932]

Thanks, bladeberkman!  To answer your question, at present, it's all set up as a package deal, but it's fully FLEX-based.  Because of that, the components can be broken up further--into the same size chunks one is accustomed to seeing with the RHW, in fact--and extended to do more things going forward. 

The strategy I'm trying with some of these newer RHW components is to get a stable QuickChange Xpress (FLEX pre-fab) in place first, so there's something solid and immediately accessible that's ready to go.  Once that's established, it becomes time to flesh out the capabilities of the smaller chunks, so the hardcore RHW enthusiasts can then go wild with them.

-Tarkus

[velrox 39]

can you connect an RD-6 and AVE-4 together in that intersection you mentioned?

[Tarkus 6,932]

On 2/8/2018 at 8:30 PM, velrox said:

can you connect an RD-6 and AVE-4 together in that intersection you mentioned?

I'm having a hard time picturing just what your asking.

In any case, here's the last interchange being built in-game--it's surprisingly easy. 

And yes, that's real, in-game time.

-Tarkus

[AsimPika3172 1,129]

Best highway ever!  

[velrox 39]

5 hours ago, Tarkus said:

I'm having a hard time picturing just what your asking.

I mean I connect an RD-6 on one side and an AVE-4 on the other side.

also, I want a RHW-FTL 2-lane intersection with the ramps one-lane.

[Tarkus 6,932]

10 hours ago, velrox said:

I mean I connect an RD-6 on one side and an AVE-4 on the other side.

There are no plans to make or support such a configuration.  The lane control patterns that would result are not particularly realistic, and adding support for it would require re-implementing things in a manner that would be quite prone to instability.

10 hours ago, velrox said:

also, I want a RHW-FTL 2-lane intersection with the ramps one-lane.

Some of the configurations shown have that.  Just scroll up the page and you'll see some. 

I would advise you to temper your expectations.  We try to do what we can to push SC4 transit modding forward, but we can't support every possible configuration you might want in an instant, and some may not be practical for us to cover, either.

---------------

Getting back to development, here's a follow-on video, showing the slope tolerance abilities of the QCX setups.  This is done using the default Maxis slope settings.  The fact that this entire interchange is made of FLEX items makes this slope tolerance (even to the bumpy Maxis extremes) and easy initiation of RHW and NWM overrides possible.

-Tarkus

[redfox85 659]

Is that funky ramp going to be compatible with the L1/2 8s? - providing a way to get a L1/2 8s d2-ish.

[Tarkus 6,932]

On 2/11/2018 at 6:28 AM, redfox85 said:

Is that funky ramp going to be compatible with the L1/2 8s? - providing a way to get a L1/2 8s d2-ish.

The ramps up there are 6S A2 ramps, with a little safety modification on the entrance.  An 8S A2 would be one of those ramps we can't elevate, as the mainline turns into a 6S, causing the 6S overhang to collide in rather ugly ways.  It is possible to use the disconnector to erase the 6S A2 ramps and replace them with actual 8S D2 ramps (which do have L1/2 versions), as things stand presently.  That's probably the best (if not only) option for hooking an 8S into this configuration cleanly.  There aren't A2 ramps for the L1/L2 8C and 10S yet (they're ground-only at present), but those would also hook in nicely as well, once they're made.

In other news, I'm trying out a different design with the Dual Type 120 variant, bringing it in line with the Dual Type 230's design:

And finally, the piece de resistance:



Haven't gotten the pathing in place just yet, so that's why the signals remain green all around.  I'm also not sure about the arrow situation on the overpass portion.
 

-Tarkus