NAM General Support

[Indiana Joe 1,750]

Never hold your breath for anything transit-related.  Civil engineers are usually not particularly good at CPR.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

CPR is a railroad as far as civil engineers are concerned.  Canadian Pacific Railway by the way, is owned by CP Enterprises of Calgary, Alberta and is a private company.

[Omehenk 9]

 

Also the custom interchanges have some minor glitches: (all of them which have a diagonal part)

 

*snip*

 

Yup, those textures are something I've been meaning to patch, however I've not got round to doing it. I don't think I'll ever be able to get them to be perfect though, due to the way the Maxis Highway's textures are "assigned". I'll see what I can do

 

 

It doesn't have to be perfect:)

 

Can these bridges be added to the nam bridge controller? They look great and the maker even asks it to be added years ago : ''I hope NAMTeam find it soon,add it into new NAM please.''

 

[Lost Realist 762]

 

 

Also the custom interchanges have some minor glitches: (all of them which have a diagonal part)

 

*snip*

 

Yup, those textures are something I've been meaning to patch, however I've not got round to doing it. I don't think I'll ever be able to get them to be perfect though, due to the way the Maxis Highway's textures are "assigned". I'll see what I can do

 

 

It doesn't have to be perfect:)

 

Can these bridges be added to the nam bridge controller? They look great and the maker even asks it to be added years ago : ''I hope NAMTeam find it soon,add it into new NAM please.''

 

 

 

The 4-lane highway bridge offends me. MHW is heavily underscaled as it is, now theres another lane... :/

[GeometryMath Algebra 614]

Can these bridges be added to the nam bridge controller? They look great and the maker even asks it to be added years ago : ''I hope NAMTeam find it soon,add it into new NAM please.''

 

I doubt they will be added to the NAM installer, because the NAM Team partially discontinued MHW stuff, focusing on RealHighway development. If possible, won't you try using the RealHighway? It's a little harder to use than MHW, but in the end, the results will be pleasing. The interchanges will consume slighty more space than MHWs, but it will be worth it because MHW is notorious for being substantially underscaled. The RHW also has some cool bridges, all included in the installer.

The Project Symphony is also a must-have, but it will mostly override every stretch MHWs. Unfortunately, for you, the old pre-fab interchanges are not converted to Project Symphony specs because of their unrealistic size. Interchanges are built instead with the RHW stuff, but a little easier than using the actual RHW. For starters, Project Symphony can be used for players who are new to the RHW.

[APSMS 1,892]

I think the main reason development on MHW interchanges and stuff was due to the extensive modeling involved, and all of the members responsible for the custom interchanges have either left or are currently dormant. Modeling isn't the issue in this case, though I believe the NAM considered these bridges in the past and found them unsatisfactory for use (and conversion was too time consuming).

 

These bridges have been around awhile, so it's unlikely that these escaped their attention. I forget where I read about these bridges, however, so I can't say for sure. Probably somewhere on SC4Devotion.

 

@Geometry, I wouldn't necessarily try to make RHW converts out of everybody, especially when it is admittedly difficult to use (even by the experts and devs!). I would, however, suggest that Omehenk look at the Show us Your Interchanges thread to see the advantages of the mod when well used. I, for one, have refused to install PS because of backwards compatibility issues that I do not want to have to deal with in my older cities.

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

Can these bridges be added to the nam bridge controller? They look great and the maker even asks it to be added years ago : ''I hope NAMTeam find it soon,add it into new NAM please.''

 

It's already been reviewed by us in the past and in other discussions, but what happened is none of us were ever notified that such a bridge was gonna be made, so instead of having a bridge that can be simply placed in the NAM folder and use one of the NAM's predetermined bridge IDs, you have a bridge that the game can't recognise and you have to literally go into the NAM's own files in order to assign an ID to make the bridge work.

Not a good idea to create a bridge with that strategy, despite all good intentions, and even if you can scavenge an ID, are you sure that ID isn't being used already? Had the creator told us beforehand, we could assign an ID and could have a bridge that could immediately be usable and, maybe, be in the NAM today.

There's even a comment from Alex (Tarkus) on the comments section on one of the bridges that says the same exact thing.

 

I doubt they will be added to the NAM installer, because the NAM Team partially discontinued MHW stuff, focusing on RealHighway development.

I think the main reason development on MHW interchanges and stuff was due to the extensive modeling involved, and all of the members responsible for the custom interchanges have either left or are currently dormant. Modeling isn't the issue in this case, though I believe the NAM considered these bridges in the past and found them unsatisfactory for use (and conversion was too time consuming).

Generally with MHW models, you're dealing with needlessly complex models and a lot of time needed to modify those models, and the original people in charge of MHW development are pretty much missing in action or retired. The latest MHW development was essentially gap-filling with Tram-in-Avenue. With making PS-friendly MHW bridges out of the original MHW bridges, you're dealing with a completely different thing. Depending on the bridge, it won't be as simple as editing a model in Blender, because the model you're dealing is a box; certain bridges are 2.5D, not true 3D, and if a bridge is 2.5D and depending on the geometry (what's the Anglish equivalent of geometry?), it may be impossible to modify without having to reconstruct the entire bridge from scratch.

For the record, you can tell if something is 2.5D or 3D with either a really good eye or using the sizeof [number] cheat at a zoom level like zoom 3. If something appears pixelated, it's 2.5D, but if it still looks the same as it would at zoom 5 or 6, it's 3D.

[Jimmyson 1]

I'm in the process of trying to build highway junction of a similar nature to the M1/C102 outside of my hometown in Australia.

 

 

But I run into a few problems with the building of it.
 

 

I used a T-junction on-slope on the left side and after joining the straight, and demolishing the sides, I was able to place a TuLEP over the top, but I was unsuccessful in placing a TuLEP transition, as it was facing the wrong way.

On the right side, I used a straight on-slope, and found that the adjacent spot was unable to be replaced by any TuLEP pieces.

This sort of issue has been around for a long time, and I'm wondering if their is any fix for this in the foreseeable future? Cause I'm not keen on the idea of having to manually remove the side streets for a T-junction when it's going to become a straight, especially on a hill like this.

Also, while I'm on the subject, are there any plans for L1 and L2 pieces of Avenue TuLEP over RHW? It's a common thing in Melbourne to have turning lanes on overpasses, and the current NAM doesn't have all these pieces. I've seen a L2 On-slope of a A1 TuLEP Avenue, but no other puzzle pieces.

[Tarkus 6,932]

 

Can these bridges be added to the nam bridge controller? They look great and the maker even asks it to be added years ago : ''I hope NAMTeam find it soon,add it into new NAM please.''

 

It's already been reviewed by us in the past and in other discussions, but what happened is none of us were ever notified that such a bridge was gonna be made, so instead of having a bridge that can be simply placed in the NAM folder and use one of the NAM's predetermined bridge IDs, you have a bridge that the game can't recognise and you have to literally go into the NAM's own files in order to assign an ID to make the bridge work.

Not a good idea to create a bridge with that strategy, despite all good intentions, and even if you can scavenge an ID, are you sure that ID isn't being used already? Had the creator told us beforehand, we could assign an ID and could have a bridge that could immediately be usable and, maybe, be in the NAM today.

There's even a comment from Alex (Tarkus) on the comments section on one of the bridges that says the same exact thing.

 

 

 

There's other issues as well.  The creator stated that the bridges were "unfinished"--there's texture issues, they lack LHD pathing, if I'm not mistaken, and in the case of the first bridge, it has a whole extra non-functional deck, IIRC.  I actually tried discussing the matter with the creator, and his response was to release the second bridge under the same release strategy, again without clearing IID space with the NAM Team.  All the IIDs and Bridge IDs they picked were based off of data from a so-called "NAM 2008"--which is not an actual version number, and that year actually saw the release of both NAM 22 (January 1) and NAM 23 (April 24).  It's like deciding one day you're going to build a bridge across the San Francisco Bay without getting the permits, choosing the location of the bridge based off a map from 1950.  We discussed those bridges when we went toward the Monolithic NAM and included just about every bridge there was (with full permission), but because of the issues there (the fact that it was an MHW bridge was not a factor), those two were excluded.

 

 

 

I doubt they will be added to the NAM installer, because the NAM Team partially discontinued MHW stuff, focusing on RealHighway development.

 

 

 

I think the main reason development on MHW interchanges and stuff was due to the extensive modeling involved, and all of the members responsible for the custom interchanges have either left or are currently dormant. Modeling isn't the issue in this case, though I believe the NAM considered these bridges in the past and found them unsatisfactory for use (and conversion was too time consuming).

 

These bridges have been around awhile, so it's unlikely that these escaped their attention. I forget where I read about these bridges, however, so I can't say for sure. Probably somewhere on SC4Devotion.

 

@Geometry, I wouldn't necessarily try to make RHW converts out of everybody, especially when it is admittedly difficult to use (even by the experts and devs!). I would, however, suggest that Omehenk look at the Show us Your Interchanges thread to see the advantages of the mod when well used. I, for one, have refused to install PS because of backwards compatibility issues that I do not want to have to deal with in my older cities.

 

We haven't "discontinued" MHW content--all the MHW stuff that was there previously is still there, and will continue to be an option in perpetuity--and we'll continue to feature Project Symphony and samerton's retexture as options.  But aside from occasional very minor gapfill using existing models, development on new pieces/interchanges for the stock, non-PS MHWs is effectively frozen indefinitely.  andreharv was the NAMite to most recently create MHW interchanges (he created 3 of the 5 that weren't pieced together from pre-existing MHW interchanges), but he hasn't been active in about 4 years.  And TheGreatChozo and redlotus (who worked together for the other 2 of 5 and apparently left a third unfinished and lost to the ether) have been gone for 8-9 years.  Not only are they difficult to make, the people who make them get burnt out after spending an average of 6 months for one interchange.

 

As far as the RHW goes, I think the people who have felt overwhelmed by it will want to give it another shot with NAM 32, because of QuickChange, which may change some minds rather quickly.  There's only going to be a set of 4 QuickChange setups in NAM 32, but the plan is to expand that further in future releases, to the point where the novice user could handle most basic needs with them, or advanced users could use them in many situations to speed things along.

 

Edit:

 

This sort of issue has been around for a long time, and I'm wondering if their is any fix for this in the foreseeable future? Cause I'm not keen on the idea of having to manually remove the side streets for a T-junction when it's going to become a straight, especially on a hill like this.

Also, while I'm on the subject, are there any plans for L1 and L2 pieces of Avenue TuLEP over RHW? It's a common thing in Melbourne to have turning lanes on overpasses, and the current NAM doesn't have all these pieces. I've seen a L2 On-slope of a A1 TuLEP Avenue, but no other puzzle pieces.

 

As far as the on-slope issue, the addition of draggable Road/OWR/AVE viaducts with FLEX on-slopes should help considerably.

 

Turning lanes on overpasses are ubiquitous here in the US, but TuLEP-over-RHW (or anything else) situations open up a can of worms with respect to implementation.  The OnSlope one was designed entirely for one purpose--use with the elevated FlexSPUI system in the RHW. If we took the suggestion literally, and made single puzzle pieces for those various basic situations over RHW, it'd require 50+ puzzle pieces.  I agree that it'd be a nice thing to have for realism purposes, but it won't happen until we can devise a method other than creating tons of static puzzle pieces.  TuLEP development is kind of in an odd spot right now, in large part because we're trying to get away from puzzle onslaught with many of our projects right now.  There's been some interesting ideas floated, which would be marvelous if they pass an initial implementation test, but I don't expect there to be any prototypes to show the public for awhile still.

 

-Tarkus

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Proselytizing for RHW is something like those guys at the door who open with "Friend, have you been saved?"  It is up to the individual player to venture into these very difficult and mostly uncharted waters, and no one can know in advance if the game is worth the candle.  The RHW world is a universe of acronyms and in-terms that I, personally, do not choose to embark upon at this time because I simply do not need it. 

 

I continue to use MHW which, considering the scale of the game, is quite satisfactory.  I do use the re-skin for this, however, as gray highways are not in my book of nice.  I found Project Symphony was a rather unsubtle introduction and come-on for RHW.  It is also not my bag, in fact I found this was like a symphony written by PDQ Bach. (Schikerdink catalogue No. N₂O).

 

I am also one of those stubborn people who do not use GLR, even though my signature shows an early effort with it, before it became what it is today.

 

I suggest that the emphasis lately on the RHW is simply because it has recently been overhauled in the latest NAM release.  If work on MHW were to cease and remain where it is, this would be quite satisfactory.  NWM definitely needs some work to make them as functional as the default road network.

 

IMHO, RHW is for people who want to emulate the U.S. highway networks, which is really impossible in a 4 Km² city tile and truly not feasible except for the cross-border features if you wanted a highway across many city tiles.  We are building cities, not limited access expressways.  This is really outside the parameters of the original game.  In fact, most RL towns won't fit on a large tile.  The village I live in with a population of around 1200 is bigger than that.  I think RHW addicts spend more time drawing their highways than playing the game.  Everyone to his own.

[MandelSoft 2,769]

I suggest that the emphasis lately on the RHW is simply because it has recently been overhauled in the latest NAM release.  If work on MHW were to cease and remain where it is, this would be quite satisfactory.  NWM definitely needs some work to make them as functional as the default road network.

And that's exactly what we will be planning to do. The RHW is already very feature-rich, that not really much can be added. We might want to overhaul the FLEXfly and add some extra crosslinkage, but it's not like we need entire new networks. The NAM 32 will add some functionality to the RHW, but it will also introduce the Real Railway Mod (RRW) and draggable overpasses for Maxis networks. In the NAM 33 however, the focus of development will probably be the NWM, TuLEPs, Roundabouts and even the rail-based networks.

IMHO, RHW is for people who want to emulate the U.S. highway networks, which is really impossible in a 4 Km² city tile and truly not feasible except for the cross-border features if you wanted a highway across many city tiles.  We are building cities, not limited access expressways.  This is really outside the parameters of the original game.  In fact, most RL towns won't fit on a large tile.  The village I live in with a population of around 1200 is bigger than that.  I think RHW addicts spend more time drawing their highways than playing the game.  Everyone to his own.

Well, that's why I spread out my cities over multiple city tiles. With the current project I'm working on (a co-op project) is a city of more than a million citizens that uses quite a lot of RHW, but it's spread over at least a dozen large city tiles. It's truly a huge city with lots of suburban development (and these sub-urbs mostly have non-gridded street patterns, but rather a time intensive method of tree layout patters, which does look quite nice). You may say that a lot of time will be spent on building the RHW, but at the NORO co-operative it's actually one of the LEAST time intensive aspects, probably due to experience...

Best,

Maarten

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Well, Maarten, we are certainly in agreement on the track to take with RHW.  I've found that the amount of civil engineering rather excessive to get that package to work properly.  Some landscapes are just not suitable and need to be tamed with a lot of effort.

[Tarkus 6,932]

Proselytizing for RHW is something like those guys at the door who open with "Friend, have you been saved?"

 

 

Yes, good ol' technology evangelism.  And it seems to have worked.  According to the recent poll, about 80% of NAM users are also using the RHW, as opposed to just 52% of NAM users using the NAM's MHW options.  The reason, of course, for turning people onto the RHW and its approach to interchanges, had to do with the massive slew of standing requests for Maxis Highway interchanges back in 2006.  I did a post on SimTarkus about the whole philosophy behind all that last month.

 

-Tarkus

[Omehenk 9]

I just added both bridges to the bridgecontroller and they look really beautiful. Guess it's not feasible to add them to the nam now, since it's so easy. But i'm hoping the communication will be better if he decides to update them or make new ones. (Maybe a language barrier since his english isn't looking that good, maybe be a bit more clear to him the nam-team does want to add his bridges and what he needs to do for that to happen?)

 

 

Since I've started again with SC4 back in june I've done nothing but trying out tons of mods. (Back in the day I played without Rush Hour or anything custom at all.) So you can imagine a lot has come onto me, in the terms of many years of great custom made stuff (and the not so great), all the seemingly unfindable dependencies and the nam with its many options (which is great btw) and all the abbreviations.

 

I did try out the RHW out as one of the first things, but I didn't like a few things about it, which I should've posted somewhere on the Simtropolis. Don't recall where though. Also tried out Project Symphony (typing this I know what PS means ), but for the time being I'd rather stay at MHW untill maybe i move over to RHW one day. I like the look of the MHW over the RHW atm, although RHW has far more potential of course.

 

Thanks for the info Ganaram Inukshuk, does that mean the FLUPs and a few of the bridges I posted here about a few days ago are 2.5D and most other things are 3D, or do I need glasses?

 

@Tarkum

I did notice a couple texture issues, but when i made this post (way worse (texture?) problems in my eyes about some nam bridges I was told it was an old problem and hardly anyone cared about it. Maybe they are too hard to tackle though, since they've been in there from the beginning and everyone here talks about how hard Maxis roads are.

You're right it doesn't work that way, i'm just hoping he'll pm's  someone if he decides to work on it again.

Sorry to hear about how hard it is to make MHW interchanges and that everyone who were making them quit. I'm also ok with ceased updates of MHW interchanges, since they are of limited use anyway. But i'm still rooting for lots of upgrades for MHW until RHW really is better in (almost) every way and maybe almost as easy to use.

 

You don't have to play on 1 city tile A Nonny Moose, this isn't simcity 2013. I'm planning to utilize the whole 48 states map and there are tons of other great maps. (but you know that already)

 

@APMS:

I did look at the ''Show us Your Interchanges'' thread and many other ''Show us Your'' threads, . Especially Maartens interchange with the brown trees looks awesome. I think you should try out PS if you like it, backwards compatibility on this game is better then people make it out to be on lots of mods. Like Maartens ''remove highway signs'', which removed all but one highway sign in a city with a lot of highways. Or using a tree controller which always come with warnings like this:

BUT FIRST you must bulldoze all flora planted with that tree-controller. For this reason it is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED that you switch tree controllers only when starting new cities; new regions would be even better. Loading a city tile that has trees on it from a tree controller that no longer exists in your plugins will result in a Crash To Desktop.

Tried a number of tree controllers, abused them, but didn't see any crashing, only auto-removed trees after removing the controller.

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

I just added both bridges to the bridgecontroller and they look really beautiful. Guess it's not feasible to add them to the nam now, since it's so easy. But i'm hoping the communication will be better if he decides to update them of make new ones. (Maybe a language barrier since his english isn't looking that good, maybe be a bit more clear to him the nam-team does want to add his bridges and what he needs to do for that to happen?)

Actually, it's not easy as assigning an ID. You also need to consider LHD support, which both bridges surprisingly lack, and if LHD support does not exist (and everything in the NAM needs to have LHD support), then it's less likely for them to be added. I'm not sure if it's a language barrier (and I'm a bit doubtful that it is), but as stated above, when the first bridge was made, Alex tried to communicate with the creator, but instead of the creator responding, he instead released a second bridge without any formal discussion.

The best way for any bridge maker to add a bridge to the NAM is to first speak to someone on the NAM Team on how to add it. We're the ones who have the IDs and we know which ones are reserved, and if we know beforehand, we could simply hand over one of those IDs. Otherwise, if the bridge uses a randomly selected ID and the maker doesn't to respond to anyone on the team, it's not likely that a bridge made that way would ever be added (unless the creator is super-lenient on redistribution and reuse and explicitly states it in a formal manner that the creator will allow redistribution and reuse).

[MandelSoft 2,769]

Even more so, I've tried to re-fit this bridge to Project Symphony standards, but I never could get the models to work properly in-game, sadly enough.

Another thing is that these bridges are overly specific in length constraints. They HAVE to be a certain length, making it a pain for them to show up in the bridge building menu. Unless if we are writing special bridge RULs for them, this problem will remain...

[timmie 988]

Is it correct there is no dual RHW 4-FAR to diagonal curve? It's also a pity there are no curves for dual RHW6-S, is there a reason for this?

[MandelSoft 2,769]

Is it correct there is no dual RHW 4-FAR to diagonal curve?

That one was broken, but FYI, I've fixed it on our end and now it works properly:

It's also a pity there are no curves for dual RHW6-S, is there a reason for this?

It's just a matter of time before we make them

[Kuewr665 40]

I thought curves for RHW-6S could just be placed next to each other.

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

I thought curves for RHW-6S could just be placed next to each other.

You'll always get a giant gap between the two curves.

[MandelSoft 2,769]

Only the 45 degree curves can be placed right next to each other. The FARHW-6S doesn't have such functionality.

[Kuewr665 40]

Oh, I did not know timmie meant the FARHW curves.

[Omehenk 9]

Only the bigger (right) one Maarten, but like i said. i'm just hoping he'll pm's someone if he decides to work on the bridges again. Also lights need to be added.

 

Any idea on when nam 32 is coming out? Really looking forward to what it brings.

[Kuewr665 40]

No release dates for the NAM, ever. It is released when it is released.

The same is true for most custom content anyway.

[Cascadia 0]

im having an issue that just cropped up. NAM seemed to be working fine for 13ish years into the game. then something happened, not sure what, but now the avenue scemes keep rotating between 3 different 'styles'. when i turn 'night' mode on, you can see the street lights flashing on and off up and down the entire avenues. some of the avenues have light rail installed.

 

ive been having issues with the light rail/avenue stations. right now they are 'invisible' and show they are being utlized, however i dont see any light rail trains on the streets even when i used a downloadable station that was visible.

 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Have you added any transportation mods lately?

[Pelipper 7]

I can't get viaduct rail over street to mesh with the rest of my street network. As far as I can tell, I've done everything right, but the streets will not connect. The fact that the viaduct rail tiles are reserved means I can't connect them the normal way.

[Ganaram Inukshuk 906]

I can't get viaduct rail over street to mesh with the rest of my street network.

You need to drag the Street out first and then place the piece on top of the Street, not the other way around.

[Pelipper 7]

 

I can't get viaduct rail over street to mesh with the rest of my street network.

You need to drag the Street out first and then place the piece on top of the Street, not the other way around.

 

Oh, that makes more sense. Thank you.

[¡No pasarán 13]

Hello!

My problem is about aveneu, road, street sidewalks textures after i installed nam (2013 version 3.2). The are green grass line in my avenue textures. How i dissappered it from the game? Please help! Thx! Sorry for my english.

https://postimg.cc/image/g8d5gi2jt/

I downloaded "no grass mod", but my problem after is.

Maybe i put wrong place the no grass mod?