NAM General Support

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

Try this:

You're forgetting steps 0 and -1, which is preparing the elevated section so it doesn't end up like this:

This is one of those things that is not only insufficiently documented, but is hard to demonstrate (or even explain) without visuals... I'd make a video but I'd have to actually record it first and I have a class in the morning so it's gonna have to wait...

[KevinPaul06 57]

Is there a way to cut RHW-8S in a pair of RHW-4S so that I could make an interchange?

[MandelSoft 2,769]

Of course! There has been an option for that since version 3.0:

 

(Oh man, the memories!)

 

What you're looking for is the RHW-8S type D2 ramp, which can be found under the RHW ramps button

[KevinPaul06 57]

Of course! There has been an option for that since version 3.0:

 

 

(Oh man, the memories!)

 

What you're looking for is the RHW-8S type D2 ramp, which can be found under the RHW ramps button

Oh pardon me sir. I meant elevated RHW-8S to elevated pair of RHW-4S. my bad.

[MandelSoft 2,769]

Then no. Modeling has always been an issue during NAM development, and this is especially true for elevated ramp interfaces.

[GTSinc 6]

Try this:

 

 

 

I did and this was the result.  It doesn't make any attempt to go under it.

 

Thank you very much for your help though... I will continue to play with it and see if I can get it to work

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

I did and this was the result.  It doesn't make any attempt to go under it.

You know how I said that I'd make a video? I did.

If it's not showing up, it will in a few minutes.

The fault lies in the fact that the RHW "bend" is being drawn improperly. Try drawing RHW "bends" the way I demonstrate in the vid.

[GTSinc 6]

 

I did and this was the result.  It doesn't make any attempt to go under it.

You know how I said that I'd make a video? I did.

If it's not showing up, it will in a few minutes.

The fault lies in the fact that the RHW "bend" is being drawn improperly. Try drawing RHW "bends" the way I demonstrate in the vid.

 

 

Ok I followed your directions exactly drawing the overpass and this is my result with trying to draw the RHW under it: It starts out like that

 

But when I try to drag it:

[R30hedron 28]

This might be a rather unique use case...

To create this, I used L0-L1 FlexOST and got rid of the (what I assume are) starters on the ends with rail, then dragged through the rest of the RHW. While not the most elegant or straight forward setup, it is more compact than having a tile of flat ground next to the RHW going underneath. Although, the RHW will not override properly for the overpass... No room for an RHW 4 L1 starter piece in that spot to force the override, though that does sort of work if the overpass is just one tile longer... Any advice?

Also, it seems that some RHW networks, particularly elevated ones (or RHW 6S for some reason) have lower resolution textures than the rest of the networks... regardless of how many times I try to re-install the NAM...

    -R30

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

This might be a rather unique use case...

<>

Also, it seems that some RHW networks, particularly elevated ones (or RHW 6S for some reason) have lower resolution textures than the rest of the networks... regardless of how many times I try to re-install the NAM...

First part's probably a partial override failure due to insufficient override code.

Second issue's answered in the RHW FAQ in the RHW User's Manual.

Scratch the first part, I was able to get it right. Have you tried the areas near the crossing?

[R30hedron 28]

Second issue's answered in the RHW FAQ in the RHW User's Manual.

Ah, so the graininess of the textures are unavoidable for the time being? Fair enough, I'll manage.

 

Scratch the first part, I was able to get it right. Have you tried the areas near the crossing?

I've clicked on every tile of RHW with the RHW tool in an attempt to get the override to work (even the transitions themselves). Rebuilding the overpass elsewhere didn't help either... If I have to swap the overpass for an underpass, then I will; there are always workarounds and alternate solutions for these things.

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

I've clicked on every tile of RHW with the RHW tool in an attempt to get the override to work (even the transitions themselves). Rebuilding the overpass elsewhere didn't help either... If I have to swap the overpass for an underpass, then I will; there are always workarounds and alternate solutions for these things.

Are you sure you're up-to-date with the NAM? We're up to version 31.2... I'm able to replicate your overpass with no problem whatsoever, so that's the only possible issue...

[R30hedron 28]

 

Are you sure you're up-to-date with the NAM? We're up to version 31.2... I'm able to replicate your overpass with no problem whatsoever, so that's the only possible issue...

 

 

Huh... I am on NAM 31.2 with controller version "r184 RHD (s-series)", up-to-date as far as I'm aware... only other ideas are that I'm building the overpass in such a way that thwarts the overrides or I need to have the e-series controller. Or something else silly that I'm blind to...

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

Huh... I am on NAM 31.2 with controller version "r184 RHD (s-series)", up-to-date as far as I'm aware...

E-series controller has all of the extra stabilisation and the L3 and L4 RHW networks...

[R30hedron 28]

E-series controller has all of the extra stabilisation and the L3 and L4 RHW networks...

 

Swapping the install to the e-series controller didn't help... I rebuilt the overpass and the network still wouldn't override...

I'll manage without it for the time being, but I'll still fiddle with it and see if I can get it to work properly... I'll re-read the documentation to see if I'm doing something incorrectly. Thanks for the help so far though!

[Wiimeiser 444]

Try putting the FlexTrans out one tile more because IIRC FlexTrans needs one extra tile to stabilize. If that doesn't work you could use the extra space provided to plop a starter or two.

[Tarkus 6,932]

To add to what Wiimeiser said, I don't believe there was stability in place for that particular adjacency in NAM 31.2  There is in the current NAM 32 developmental build, however, so it should work when the new version becomes available (no ETA, as has been standard policy with the exception of NAM 31.0).

 

-Tarkus

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

I forgot I was using a dev build, didn't I...? (DERP)

[Durfsurn 539]

Just a quick question. Could anyone provide a list of completed and/or definite inclusions to NAM 32? I understand if you want to keep it kinda secret so people don't get disappointed if its not in the release however. Also is there any news on the draggability of road/OWR/Ave viaducts? I know I saw Alex (Tarkus) show us some development!

[Tarkus 6,932]

I forgot I was using a dev build, didn't I...? (DERP)

 

Happens to the best of us.

 

Just a quick question. Could anyone provide a list of completed and/or definite inclusions to NAM 32? I understand if you want to keep it kinda secret so people don't get disappointed if its not in the release however. Also is there any news on the draggability of road/OWR/Ave viaducts? I know I saw Alex (Tarkus) show us some development!

 

We're still in the process of figuring out just what will go into NAM 32, and some features that are on the table now may end up getting cut, for various reasons (mainly not being able to get them into decent enough shape with RL constraints), so it wouldn't be possible or prudent to devise a whole list.  I also can't speak with absolute certainty about projects undertaken by other NAMites.

 

The draggable Road/OWR/AVE viaducts, however, are far enough along that I can say for certain that they'll be in NAM 32, in both L1 (7.5m) and L2 (15m) forms.  That'll include support for Orthogonal x Orthogonal overpasses, FLEX OnSlopes, and at least limited (non-overpassing) diagonal functionality.  There was one big project that had been initially planned for NAM 32, but its creator is waiting for NAM 33, due to RL.  We're trying to be a little more cautious about overextending ourselves and going on marathon development cycles.  The Monolithic NAM has actually done wonders to curb that, as there's piece of mind among the developers, that we can release more regularly now.

 

Oh, and there may be a "secret weapon" . . . it's not quite ready for unveil, but it's really pretty surprising.

 

-Tarkus

[Durfsurn 539]

Ah cheers Alex on that quick response. Also I was wondering if this was possible:

 

Using a FLEX- On Slope to make a L1 network transition to an L2 network on a slope?

[Tarkus 6,932]

Ah cheers Alex on that quick response. Also I was wondering if this was possible:

 

Using a FLEX- On Slope to make a L1 network transition to an L2 network on a slope?

 

That already is possible.  The functionality probably isn't the most stable right now, but if you plug an L1 network into the bottom end of an L0-L1 "1-level" FLEX OnSlope, it' should turn into a L1-L2 onslope.

 

-Tarkus

[Durfsurn 539]

Hmmmm. I've been getting trouble with that. I'll post some pics soon....

[Tarkus 6,932]

If you're doing plain RHW-2, it probably won't work.  Somehow, I managed to not include any code or models for L1-L2 RHW-2.   That's since been fixed in dev builds for NAM 32.  But it should work for other networks now with 31.2.

 

-Tarkus

[Durfsurn 539]

Okay. Watch this space for pics in a sec... 

 

This is L1 onslope with starters only on the higher ground:

(Problems with MIS, and 7C)

 

 

With starters on the L2 side 7C gets fixed but not the MIS:

 

 

L1-L3 works kinda:

 

 

On the whole great functionality NAM team though it would be nice to fix that MIS bug

[Wiimeiser 444]

I wonder what got delayed... Hope it wasn't the RRW or Turbo Roundabouts...

[GTSinc 6]

 

 

I did and this was the result.  It doesn't make any attempt to go under it.

You know how I said that I'd make a video? I did.

If it's not showing up, it will in a few minutes.

The fault lies in the fact that the RHW "bend" is being drawn improperly. Try drawing RHW "bends" the way I demonstrate in the vid.

 

 

Ok I followed your directions exactly drawing the overpass and this is my result with trying to draw the RHW under it: It starts out like that

 

But when I try to drag it:

 

 

So any solution for my issue?

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

So any solution for my issue?

I've pretty much did everything I can to show how to draw the overlap the correct way. The only thing left to show you is the same exact setup, but with a different network. This is what's happening:

When you draw Road bends like this, you'll either get a nice and smooth bend (left) or the ugly and crooked one (right). Depending on how you draw it, you'll get one or the other. There is a method of getting it right, but it takes a long time to describe and requires an entire manual's worth of explanation, and I unfortunately don't have the time (sleeeep) or the space to do it in just one single post. In a nutshell, when you drag a Road bend, don't let go of the mouse button just yet. Instead, drag the cursor to look at how the "right" and "wrong" Road bends are drawn, and do everything you can to draw the "right" one. (It takes a lot of practise...)

These are the same "right" and "wrong" states that the RHW bend can be in, except that they appear identical. This is a quirk in the RHW that is fixable, but for some reason was never addressed. If you can practise the technique on how to draw the "right" Road bend, you can apply the same techniques with RHW.

-----

OK, I do have one more video to show, and it's not my preferred method, but it works. And one other thing: Begin without any starters at all.

[Indiana Joe 1,750]

"Takes too long to explain?"  I can explain it in a sentence:  drag diagonal stretches such that you drag two squares of road in-line with the orthogonal road you are starting from, rather than only one square.

 

But nice visual explanations anyway.

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

"Takes too long to explain?"  I can explain it in a sentence:  drag diagonal stretches such that you drag two squares of road in-line with the orthogonal road you are starting from, rather than only one square.

Even I can't understand what that meant, and that's the big issue here: Explaining things in a way that can be understood by anyone. The best way that I can accomplish that is by explaining things as a step-by-step process, but that would take so many images that I'd have bandwith issues with either Imgur or Imageshack.