Bugfix: Wrong "Traffic Noise" for R$$

[Kartenhaus 73]

During my normal gameplay there have been numerous times where "Traffic Noise" of Residential buildings seemed to behave in weird ways.
I also don't seem to be alone - I believe to have found a handful of posts on the web describing such issues, yet I couldn't find any concrete answers or fixes.

Now I think I have been able to pinpoint where things go wrong.
Through experimentation I might have just found a working fix aswell.

 

In the following image I have built an example city that nicely isolates the issue I found. The red arrows show the building I am analyzing aswell as the value I am interested in:

As you can see, "Traffic Noise" for this R$$ building is "High" although no "Road Traffic Volume" is present anywhere around it.
Trust me when I say that there is not a single car around since this part of the city is pedestrian only!
Since "pedestrians" do not count towards "road traffic", at least with the NAM installed, they also do not cause any "Traffic Noise" for Residential or "Customers" for Commercial buildings.
The R$ and R$$$ buildings around it all seem to behave correctly, only R$$ seems to show "High" "Traffic Noise" when it should most definitely be "Low".

 

Now the first course of action was firing up iLive's Reader to see what values find.
The following values can be found in "General" -> "Developer" -> "Residential $"/"Residential $$"/"Residential $$$":

Info    "How much traffic volume is a factor in desireability"
Name    Traffic Effect
Residential $    0.000000,2.000000,256.000000,-2.000000 
Residential $$    0.000000,5.000000,15.000000,5.000000,30.000000,4.000000,45.000000,4.000000,60.000000,4.000000,75.000000,3.000000,90.000000,3.000000,105.000000,3.000000,120.000000,2.000000,135.000000,2.000000,150.000000,1.000000,165.000000,1.000000,180.000000,0.000000,195.000000,0.000000,210.000000,-1.000000,225.000000,-2.000000,240.000000,-3.000000,256.000000,-5.000000   
Residential $$$    0.000000,10.000000,256.000000,-10.000000

 

As we can see, the R$$ values for "Traffic Effect" seem to be the only ones very different from the rest.
I therefore decided to make the format here exactly like in R$ and R$$$.
Looking at the outermost values of the many ones for R$$ I logically concluded:

Residential $$    0.000000,5.000000,256.000000,-5.000000

 

I created a small mod with these values (attached below) and then fired up the game with the same save as before.
And here is the result:

The building now seems to behave exactly like the R$ and R$$$ buildings around it.
By more playtesting I was also happy to see that "Traffic Noise" increased to "Medium" and finally to "High" when I got more and more cars to drive by it.

I also tried removing the mod and placing it again. The switch between "High" and "Low" appears to always work reliably.

 

As a final note, I actually don't have special technical knowledge about SC4 to have an idea how the game treats the amount of values given to any property.
I believe I have seen numerous places in iLive's Reader where the amount of values varied similiarly, although it is all for the same Exemplar property.
Maybe there are other parts in the game where such differences have unintended effects?

Residential_§§_TrafficEffectFix_v1.zip

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

38 minutes ago, Kartenhaus said:

Through experimentation I might have just found a working fix aswell.

Excellent deductive reasoning and a perfect example of how to isolate a problem.

 

39 minutes ago, Kartenhaus said:

Residential $$    0.000000,5.000000,15.000000,5.000000,30.000000,4.000000,45.000000,4.000000,60.000000,4.000000,75.000000,3.000000,90.000000,3.000000,105.000000,3.000000,120.000000,2.000000,135.000000,2.000000,150.000000,1.000000,165.000000,1.000000,180.000000,0.000000,195.000000,0.000000,210.000000,-1.000000,225.000000,-2.000000,240.000000,-3.000000,256.000000,-5.000000   

For this I'm sure you are just saving space in the post and prolly already know this tip. Many things tucked away in exemplars are in pairs in the form of data threshold, effect value so in those cases it really helps to look at them in two columns using your favorite text editor or even a spreadsheet like this:

  0.000000, 5.000000,
 15.000000, 5.000000,
 30.000000, 4.000000,
 45.000000, 4.000000,
 60.000000, 4.000000,
 75.000000, 3.000000,
 90.000000, 3.000000,
105.000000, 3.000000,
120.000000, 2.000000,
135.000000, 2.000000,
150.000000, 1.000000,
165.000000, 1.000000,
180.000000, 0.000000,
195.000000, 0.000000,
210.000000,-1.000000,
225.000000,-2.000000,
240.000000,-3.000000,
256.000000,-5.000000

^ This one having multiple entries shows they were working on specific breakpoints. The R$ and R$$$ just set the endpoints and then the data would be interpolated for the range in between. (Colour ramps for all the data views work using both concepts.)
 

45 minutes ago, Kartenhaus said:

As a final note, I actually don't have special technical knowledge about SC4 to have an idea how the game treats the amount of values given to any property.

And herein likes the beauty of using the scientific method of trial and error with repeated tests. You don't have to have know what those numbers mean to the game itself to find that one set does one thing and another does something else. Since you've made the settings for the effect value halfway between R$ and R$$$ that strikes a good balance for what Maxis prolly intended.

In defense of the Maxis programmers they likely had many ideas in development which they were experimenting with. Then the money hungry managers came in and said: We've decided to release this early so wrap it up for shipping. It was then a scramble to tidy up all those half tested ideas and the one you found looks like it slipped thru.

 

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

@Kartenhaus

I've added a linky to your bugfix on my About Me page (down in the by other authors section). You could also toss this on the STEX where more peeps will see it.

[Kartenhaus 73]

Alright, very glad my approach seems to be correct.

I don't know if maybe some more playtesting would be a good idea but it does seem like a very obvious fix.

I might just post it on the STEX if there are no issues with it.

[Terring 6,476]

I've always wondered how traffic noise affects the residential zones. I know that for commercial zones noise means customers, so the higher the noise the more the customers, although I'm not sure how important is having plenty of customers since I've never met shops and offices being abandoned because of lack of customers. Similarly, I've never see homes being abandoned from too much traffic noise, although I always try to have it as low as possible with mass transit and not too much road and avenues close to them.

Sorry for hijacking this topic for posting silly questions

[Kartenhaus 73]

I have now posted this fix on the STEX:

 

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

1 hour ago, Kartenhaus said:

I have now posted this fix on the STEX:

Nice. That'll get it out there for more peeps to enjoy.

I downloaded your file from the STEX and I noticed the file is named using the § symbols as are the folder and files inside. This is really professional in appearance for SC4 mods, however, it will cause some operating systems to get confuzzled. CB and I took the liberty of repackaging it so they are all named with the $ signs in place of the Simoleon ones. (The § symbol in file names is the reason a hundred or so files from the STEX got lost in a server hop a few years ago because the transfer protocol didn't know what to do with it and so it simply skipped those files. We want to ensure that doesn't happen with yours.)

I've now peeked inside your .dat file and I see it needs to modify the properties of Exemplar 6534284A-67CD5FA1-00001020. You'll prolly want to mention that in the description and specifically state it won't be compatible with CAM and may also interfere with other mods which modify the same exemplar. For the CAM, your modified property would have to be edited directly in the CAM file so the fix could be applied, just not via dropping in your file.

Note: I'm not nitpicking in any way, but just letting you know that there could be some negative comments if not letting peeps know that it could interfere with other mods. This is the part I personally find very difficult when posting mods myself. I simply don't know what other mod's toes it could step on.

[Kartenhaus 73]

Thank you very much for the corrections, I had the slight feel I was missing some aspects.
The § signs were definitely a mistake, me forgetting how to pay attention when typing...
Would it be enough to just mention "Is incompatible with the CAM" or should I specify more about the exact exemplar information?

I will update my description in detail later, since I sadly currently don't have time left.
I have added a disclaimer on the STEX page informing about the information still being under construction.

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

I'd prolly say it like this:

Please note that this mod fixes some values in the R$$ Residential Developer Exemplar 6534284A-67CD5FA1-00001020 and is not directly compatible with CAM. The corresponding property in CAM's version of that exemplar can be edited directly to apply this fix. Also note, that any other mod which modifies Exemplar 6534284A-67CD5FA1-00001020 would need direct editing rather than just dropping in this one I created.

(Feel free to copy and paste that if you like how it's worded.)

[Kartenhaus 73]

Alright, thx!

Do you mind if I steal these sentences or should I credit you?

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

52 minutes ago, Kartenhaus said:

Do you mind if I steal these sentences or should I credit you?

I'd edited my post above saying you can use them. And my statements aren't anything spectacular, so just steal them. No credit to me needed.

[Kartenhaus 73]

Disregarding what I said earlier about doing it later I just uploaded an updated version.

I'm always happy to hear if there are still some things I should improve.

[jeffryfisher 2,176]

15 hours ago, Kartenhaus said:

Would it be enough to just mention "Is incompatible with the CAM" or should I specify more about the exact exemplar information?

If your STEX description can point to this thread, then peeps can both get the info and post more questions / suggestions (which will be useful when some of us CAM users get around to trying to edit our own).

BTW, Is anyone maintaining CAM these days? Could a patch be issued?

[rsc204 21,867]

1 hour ago, jeffryfisher said:

BTW, Is anyone maintaining CAM these days? Could a patch be issued?

Not unless Invisichem happens to return any time soon. Fixing this isn't exactly difficult, it just requires one edit in Reader. Alternately one could take a copy of each of the CAM versions of this Exemplar, it may be the same one is used for all even and place it into a DAT. You could then release a patch much like the I-HT fix, which users had to DATPack this replacement Exemplar into their original DAT from CAM.

[Kartenhaus 73]

3 hours ago, jeffryfisher said:

If your STEX description can point to this thread, then peeps can both get the info and post more questions / suggestions (which will be useful when some of us CAM users get around to trying to edit our own).

The description should contain the link to this thread, unless something went wrong here.

I have also added CorinaMarie's sentences regarding CAM incompatibility, which was the main reason for the 1.0.1 version update .

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

3 minutes ago, Kartenhaus said:

The description should contain the link to this thread, unless something went wrong here.

I've checked, and yes it does contain the linky to here and said linky does work properly.

[xxdita 1,097]

I can verify that the link on the STEX does indeed work.  But I forget how I found the file in the first place. 

On 11/12/2019 at 12:40 PM, jeffryfisher said:

If your STEX description can point to this thread, then peeps can both get the info and post more questions / suggestions (which will be useful when some of us CAM users get around to trying to edit our own).

BTW, Is anyone maintaining CAM these days? Could a patch be issued?

The good news is that the Developer Exemplars are not what need to be DatPacked into SimCIty_1.dat in order to work properly, thus allowing a patch for CAM 1.0 to be quick, easy, and can stay in a z_mods folder no problem. So I can test this out over the next couple of days, then get a patch released. 

The bad news is that the Developer Exemplars are part of each Playstyle of CAM 2.0, so a total of 5 patches are necessary. I could do that, but then you'd have to remember to swap out the R$$ fix mod each time you change CAM Playstyles. (Do people really do that?)

Updating the files themselves is even simple enough, but when it comes to redoing the automatic DatPackingCleanitolingRegistryWhatevering installer, that's out of my paygrade. I'm not gonna be fiddling with the ReadMe's either. What I can do is patch the 5 different Playstyle files for the MAC/noninstaller version, and update the LEX descriptions to give credit to @Kartenhaus for the fix, with a link to this thread in the comments. I'm also not going to be testing out all 5 different CAMs to make sure this works, so it would be helpful to hear from anyone who has been using this patch in Vanilla or CAM. I do see that @Indiana Joe posted a helpful comment on the file's STEX page, so that's a start. 

[xxdita 1,097]

Files patched. As I have done absolutely no testing yet, please use your phone to leave feedback should this blow up your computer. 

CAM R$$ trafficnoise fix.zip

[xxdita 1,097]

I'm testing this, but I just don't see any change in Traffic Noise at all. If it was high before, then it's high now. 

That's because this property determines desirability vs traffic capacities. This is the file that dictates when & where R$$ can grow, and how it can upgrade. So it only makes sense that the more available network capacity you have around any given tract, the better the network can sustain what is built there. The reverse is also true, allowing a building to grow without regard to the surrounding road capacities will likely overload your road networks. 

Since R$$ is the majority population of most developed cities, I believe the Maxis values for this property are more specific in order to balance growth around the city, giving a preference to areas with even slightly lower adjacent traffic volumes. This allows the city to grow as evenly as possible, without clogging the arteries of your transit systems. 

I've spent most of the day reading various threads regarding traffic noise, and only come to the conclusion that traffic makes noise. It's just what it does. I've tested using various network capacities and have seen no noticeable differences at all in traffic noise with increased capacity, so I believe that it's an absolute. 

My hypothesis at the moment is that any possible adjustments to traffic noise has to be done via traffic itself. No traffic, no noise. So I will be playing with a few settings in the traffic simulator tonight to test that theory. 

The problem would be balance for Commercial though. If you reduce the traffic noise, then you also reduce the number of customers for any Commercial developments. There may be a trick to counter that, but I'll do some testing before I mention it here. 

tl;dr - 1) I don't think this works to reduce noise. 2) alters current balance of R$$ growth distribution. 

[Naomi57 2,985]

Mmmmm, any chance of a "Traffic Noise / Customers" DataView, @CorinaMarie.  

I have to say the "Traffic Noise" thing is mysterious.  I know it's supposed to correspond to "Customers" ... but I don't think it does.  I think the relationship between "Traffic Noise" and "Customers" is a vague correlation, rather than a direct relationship.

• Residential "Traffic Noise" seems to be tract-based, or even neighbouring tract-based, with wide effects.
• Commercial "Customers" seems to be tile-based, and finicky down to even what direction the traffic is going morning vs evening!

Given that residential "Traffic Noise" seems to be a phenomenon with a broad spread, you might find it useful to experiment with a "road-less" residential neighbourhood.  I'm planning to do one (or both) of these techniques sometime soon, to see if I can get some whisper quiet residential zones:

1. Tram-in-street, with the tram continuing past where the streets end, so that the residents are forced to catch the tram if they want to travel further than the local supermarket, school and hospital, or
2. Transparent FLUPs, or Pedmall FLUPs, mentioned on a recent post, hides the traffic underground and satisfies the Residential street frontage zoning requirement.  I DO get the impression this causes quite a bit of grief for emergency services personnel!  

Whether Transparent FLUPs or Pedmall FLUPs, will actually hide the "Traffic Noise" underground (as opposed to just hiding the cars), would also be an interesting experiment.

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

5 minutes ago, Naomi57 said:

Mmmmm, any chance of a "Traffic Noise / Customers" DataView, @CorinaMarie.  

Nope. The Traffic Volume view is the closest we can get. Ofc, the Color ramp could be altered, but there's not any other data table I can tap into for that.

[Naomi57 2,985]

1 minute ago, CorinaMarie said:

5 minutes ago, Naomi57 said:

Mmmmm, any chance of a "Traffic Noise / Customers" DataView, @CorinaMarie.  

Nope. The Traffic Volume view is the closest we can get. Ofc, the Color ramp could be altered, but there's not other data table I can tap into for that.

It wouldn't compare to your Parks Aura DataView, anyhow.  

Traffic Volume view already is really good.  I think I've mentioned before, I spend large portions of my game watching time staring at that view and trying to discern the underlying mechanisms of the sim-cosmos.

[Naomi57 2,985]

I don't suppose it's possible to generate negative Traffic Noise, @xxdita?

That would be a truly awesome addition to Sound Barrier mods!  

[xxdita 1,097]

I have been reading up on the traffic simulator and poking around under the hood. I tried weird and random things, like taking cars out of the Generates Traffic, to see if that would just put an end to it all. And nope. Cars are noisy even when they aren't traffic. There are still other values to play with and test, but I think my next priority need to be the most obvious.  

What's believed to be the Traffic Noise/Customers coefficient doesn't even have an entry in Ingred.ini, nor is any mention made of traffic noise at all. Maxis set this value at 0.128 though, and Simulator Z has increased it to 0.25.

So basically, traffic noise is effectively doubled for anyone using Simulator Z, in order to rebalance the number of customers for Commercial types, as this one value controls both. This can be adjusted in the Traffic Simulator Tool though, to suit your playing style.

Traffic Noise does have an impact on your Sims, and the development of all wealth levels, as does Trip Length. But even maxed out, Traffic Noise only has a negative effect on Desirability of -2 for R$, -5 for R$$, and -10 for R$$$. Trip Length maxes out at -10 for all wealth levels though. Like we're seeing with the Park Effects, this is based on tracts. So it is determined for a set of 4 tiles, based on the traffic 

For Commercial, it is the exact opposite. Commercial can not exist without traffic any more than I can without caffeine. The most sensitive is CS$$$, which has a desirability range of -40 at 0 traffic to +40 with rush hour grid lock. Each Commercial type and wealth has the same sort of steps in their desirability as R$$ does, as opposed to how R$ and R$$$ use a linear path. 

If you still design your cities to have traffic flowing through commercial areas, then you should be fine using the NAM Traffic Simulator Tool to lower Traffic Noise/Commuters Coefficient closer to the Maxis standard 0.128. If you start to see abandonment in your Commercial areas, then you'll need to increase this value again. 

 

8 hours ago, Naomi57 said:

I don't suppose it's possible to generate negative Traffic Noise, @xxdita?

That would be a truly awesome addition to Sound Barrier mods!  

There are probably tricks you can use, if you take advantage of the tract system.

So this image shows a tract, and the areas it uses to determine traffic noise. If you can keep roads out of 2 or 3 of the red areas, then you should be able to cut down the noise levels. So using larger zones by holding the Ctrl button, adding parks or other plops, or just leaving the spaces open should help. 

Remember that MT stations help control traffic patterns as well, so pay attention to how those are placed and their usage %. Use the Query Tool to see where Sims are coming from to use the station, and you'll likely see some traffic you can shift by adding another station a few tracts away. 

The traffic simulator also has a property for population background traffic in each zone. I'm thinking this is to simulate all the people on the roads that are just in the way while you're trying to get to work. Lowering this for Residential may help a bit, but I think it's already set at 0.05. You'd need to change this in Reader though, as it's not a property you can adjust in the Traffic Simulator Tool. 

I should have mentioned in the last post, but Industry does not care about traffic noise at all. All it wants is a quick and easy way to get freight out. Neighbor connections clogged with commuters can get in the way of freight trucks trying to deliver their goods. 

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

@Kartenhaus

It turns out besides this being the same exemplar which CAM modifies, @Turnstyled discovered it's also the same exemplar in @Bones1's Less Abandonment mod for its LessR$$Abandonment.dat file. I've attached a modified version of that file in the following comment there which includes your Traffic Noise Fix.

Feel free to edit your STEX description and attach this as an alternative which users of Less Abandonment can download instead. In this case, I wouldn't change the file under the download button as there are a few peeps who don't use Less Abandonment so they would still want your original. But, we do want your description to mention this overlap.

If you like, I can do all the updating for you. Just let me know.

[Ostelen 2]

How do you install this patch ? 

[CorinaMarie 29,899]

1 hour ago, Ostelen said:

How do you install this patch ? 

If you are referring to the file in the first post of this thread, download the .zip file, open it, and copy the included .dat file into your Documents\SimCity 4\Plugins folder. It can go in a sub-folder of that if you want for better organization.

[Deemer 6]

Hi all,

is there still (or rather now) a CAM Version available, even if for testing? xxdita's link is not active anymore, but I believe this to be an important patch. I am using CAM, so I could test, even though I would not be entirely sure how to be sure if it works. Anyways, if anyone still has a file to test, happy to try.

Regards,

Deemer