Desirability Dataview Ideas

[StarlitBeach 160]

12 hours ago, Iodyne said:

Wow. Looks amazing! It seems its really coming along and falling into place. What does the layout look like with the desirability views put in? Also, if you have an updated beta now, I'd be happy to test it! Been using the RCI capacity beta to good use, but I definitely do need desirability views.

Thanks I'm working on adding the desirability views back in now, so should have a full version ready for testing either later today or tomorrow.

[StarlitBeach 160]

Here's an almost finished version to have a look at:

Dataview Replacements.zip

It is fully functional but there are still a couple of things to do. In particular, the colour scale for Average Age needs to be extended to 100 and the legend for the new CO$$$ Targets view needs to be changed. There are also a few translations still to be added. It changes all dataviews except Crime, Water, Traffic, Zones, and Garbage.

Here's a screenshot showing the layout of the dataview panel and the CO$$$ Targets view (quantized to show R and I lots the CO$$$ developers have their eyes on):

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

Here's some test pics.

[rivit 3,391]

lol Cori - those 40 yr olds might be rich and live in a lovely neigbourhood but they havent got long to live..

[Iodyne 36]

Here's some photos too. I'll just link to imgur album as it seems easier: https://imgur.com/a/tQwV9wN

Land value, R$$$, C$$$, and IHT (I think you can even see the effect of the incline on industry!) at the start and then after 25 years. Also after 25 years is CO$$$ targets, air pollution, water pollution (dang community gardens- I need to find a mod for to remove their pollution... and for some larger ones too), as well as Health and Average Age. Health you can easily see the extent of the clinic (though the rich beachfolk don't seem to have an issue. And because my city is so young the average age moreso just displays the timeline of development.

Lastly, I was looking at the CS$$$ and I didn't see any, though I knew I had this one building, but it wasn't showing up. I thought maybe it was because I made it historical but after switching it back and reloading it was the same. I realized then its because the minimum for the data view is 10 sims, and the store only has 6 (also I just found out you can edit the store names! ). How low does the low beta dat you made start counting? While I don't particularly mind and will stick with medium most likely, I actually do suggest releasing the low in the final version, allowing users to pick (and I guess the high too).

 

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

 

Also hey @rivit I've been enjoying your DarkNite 2Pass Cones, with your other Adds and Alters files, in the configuration shown here:

I also enjoyed your "A discussion of Light Mods." I have two questions though; I'm unfamiliar with what most of the adds and alters files do precisely, and I couldn't find any description you made about them. Also I was wondering if you happened to have any 2pass filters for cones from addons like IRM. You can see in this screenshot the industrial lots (on the right) have stronger cones. I've just been rationalizing it as "industry has stronger lights," but a fix would be nice.

 

[StarlitBeach 160]

Thanks for the great test pics @CorinaMarie @Iodyne

4 hours ago, Iodyne said:

Lastly, I was looking at the CS$$$ and I didn't see any, though I knew I had this one building, but it wasn't showing up. I thought maybe it was because I made it historical but after switching it back and reloading it was the same. I realized then its because the minimum for the data view is 10 sims, and the store only has 6 (also I just found out you can edit the store names! ). How low does the low beta dat you made start counting? While I don't particularly mind and will stick with medium most likely, I actually do suggest releasing the low in the final version, allowing users to pick (and I guess the high too).

 

I just had another look at the Low version and it does show isolated buildings with a capacity below 10, but not very well so I need to work on that. I do plan to include it as an option, as well as the High version, so that (hopefully) all city densities and mod setups (residential halvers, commercial and industrial doublers/quadruplers etc.) can be covered.

Apart from that, I think I have it more or less finished. It will be a few days before I publish it though, because there are quite a few things I'd like to test first. The only functional change I've made since the version I uploaded is to the Average Age view, which now goes up to 100 and looks like this:

[Iodyne 36]

19 minutes ago, StarlitBeach said:

Thanks for the great test pics

Of course! I'll keep testing it as time goes on of course. I suspect there may be some minor changes that could be made eventually, especially once this gets more attention as it rightfully should; it's very refreshing to have a mod like this. I have to say the modding in some areas of the game seem somewhat lacking (of course I'd love to do this myself if I had the time and ability ) and this really fills one of those holes!

 

23 minutes ago, StarlitBeach said:

I do plan to include it as an option, as well as the High version, so that all city densities and mod setups can be covered.

Sounds good!

 

25 minutes ago, StarlitBeach said:

The only functional change I've made since the version I uploaded is to the Average Age view, which now goes up to 100 and looks like this:

Looks good too!

[rivit 3,391]

9 hours ago, Iodyne said:

what most of the adds and alters files do precisely,

@Iodyne At the risk of polluting this thread the short answer is that those files are changes from the LRM as it was originally made - so are where I use the 2pass cones, and fix a few things that get out of control when you tone down the lighting - like carsales yards.  As for the bright IRM lights:  the trick is to find which light is that bright one and make an override for it using one of the 2-pass cones. But I have to say that scene you show overall looks great - there are problems with too many light poles on other lots in those bright streets, but even that happens in real life too. PM me if you have any specific things you want to chase.

[StarlitBeach 160]

Here are some more screenshots, showing how the dataview panel looks in different languages. I've kept the original Maxis text where possible but for the RCI Capacity and Desirability dataviews I had to try to piece together an appropriate translation from other text in the game, with the help of Google Translate in some cases. I also had to shorten the Average Age label in a few languages to make it fit. Hopefully it makes sense in all of them - please let me know if you spot anything that isn't right.

 

Danish

 

Dutch

 

Finnish

 

French

 

German

 

Italian

 

Norwegian

 

Polish

 

Portuguese

 

Spanish

 

Swedish

[StarlitBeach 160]

A long time (well ok, a week) ago...

On 11/05/2022 at 6:51 AM, StarlitBeach said:

It seems to be reporting the sum total of capacity in each tract - when I added the capacities of all the buildings in a tract, the result always matched the colour being shown for that tract. I haven't tested more carefully yet (by changing the colour scale to highlight tracts with a specific total capacity for example), but I'm fairly certain that's what it does.

I've tested it some more and this does seem to be exactly how the uninterpolated capacity data works - the colour of each tract is determined by its total capacity. Here's a simple example:

 

I set up the colour scale to highlight tracts with a capacity of exactly 155 in cyan, and show everything else in black. The only Cs$ building in that tract is the one I've queried.

Here's an example with multiple R$$ buildings in a tract:

 

There are eight 2 Story Houses in this tract, each with a capacity of 11, and the colour scale has been set up to highlight tracts with a capacity of 88 in cyan.

I also discovered something interesting while tweaking the colour scale for the Low version. Here is the uninterpolated data for dirty industry with the Maximum scale property set to 255 (I didn't change the legend though):

 

I am very sure that there are no dirty industry buildings in those five tracts shown in black. They only appear at all when Maximum scale is set to 255. At 510, they disappear, which means they must represent a capacity of 1 (when Maximum scale is set to 255, each increment of 1 in the colour scale represents an increment of 1 in the data).

There used to be dirty industry in these tracts but I bulldozed it, so this may be similar to the phantom park effect that can be left behind after a YIMBY/NIMBY building is bulldozed. I tried bulldozing and dezoning all the I-M buildings in one of the offending tracts, then ran it at Cheetah speed for a few months, but it would seem that I'm stuck with this phantom capacity:

 

I also tried bulldozing everything in the area to the west and letting I-M regrow there, but that didn't get rid of it.

I'm not sure if this particular form of this bug has been documented before. I wonder how common it is, and what effects it might have. Presumably no Sims can actually work at these phantom jobs so, in theory, if phantom capacity could accumulate to high enough levels it might cause subtle imbalances in demand. Or maybe it would be possible for Sims to try and reach these jobs but fail, causing them to abandon even though there are other non-imaginary jobs available.

Or maybe it has no noticeable effect at all.

[Iodyne 36]

6 minutes ago, StarlitBeach said:

it would seem that I'm stuck with this phantom capacity

Interesting... Did you also just try saving and reentering upon making the changes? I wonder if you could modify the RCI demand graph (or add a new one) somehow with high fidelity to see if it does have an effect. If there is a way to solve this proposed phantom effect, then perhaps that version of the low capacity viewer can be marketed as such: identification for phantom jobs prerequisite to whatever fix.

[StarlitBeach 160]

22 minutes ago, Iodyne said:

Interesting... Did you also just try saving and reentering upon making the changes?

Good idea. I didn't, but I've just tried it - bulldozed everything around those two tracts (plus some more to make I-M demand go positive), let I-M regrow and then saved and re-entered. The phantom I-D capacity was still there. I suspect that once it's in the save file there's no (simple) way to get rid of it.

22 minutes ago, Iodyne said:

... perhaps that version of the low capacity viewer can be marketed as such: identification for phantom jobs prerequisite to whatever fix.

I had settled on keeping the maximum capacity shown by the Low version at 500 and tweaking the colour scale at the bottom end to show low capacity buildings better, but I might now include this 'Very Low' version as well so that the phantom capacity can at least be seen after bulldozing. The only solution may be to not save if it appears. Though if the amounts remain this small it might be better to just live with it, rather than checking for phantom capacity everytime you bulldoze something, because its effect on the game is probably minimal.

Edit: of course, I'm just assuming that this is how phantom capacity is created. If it happens when the city the is saved then there would be no way to prevent it. It would be interesting to try and observe it happening in real time rather than after the fact.

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

@StarlitBeach

After a bunch of testing to replicate the phantom single dirty industrial, I believe it's an inherent bug in the Big City Tutorial tile rather than a bug prevalent within the game itself. (Tho I didn't test the other starter city tiles.)

Are you able to duplicate those phantoms in any other city tiles?

Here's Big City as copied into my Timbuktu Too region after dezoning:

^ (And yes, I deliberately changed the city tile name to an invisible non breaking space so it doesn't show at the region screen.)

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

I did some more testing in Big City in my Timbuktu Too region where the phantom single ID job was showing.

Here's a selected test area:

 

Then I blocked all ID buildings except a single one which I modded to have one single job and grew it in that exact tract:

^ The red coloring is because it's more than one single job seen by your mod (which I modded as black for 1 and the next color for 2+).

 

I saved the city tile with that grown then quit the game. I then re-modded that building to have two jobs. The idea is there is one phantom job buried in the city save data plus the one job as grown with the first version of this building.

Here we see the query of the already grown building:

 

So, with the exemplar now showing two jobs and bulldozing while it has them, the two hidden jobs in the city save data are subtracted. I dezoned, saved, then quit.

Now loading the game and city tile again and checking your dataview, it's fixed it back to normal:

 

So, I'm convinced that the phantom jobs are prolly something Maxis did in that particular city tile, but it now makes me also believe we could accidentally cause the very same sort of thing ourselves perhaps by using the Industry Doubler or Quadrupler when buildings were grown without those mods in place, but then bulldozing with them in plugins. (Or, rather, it might be the other way around.)

This latter part prolly needs more testing, but I believe you found something we didn't know before.

Nice work yet again, @StarlitBeach !

[StarlitBeach 160]

@CorinaMarie That's very interesting. It did occur to me to wonder whether the problem was already present in that particular tile but I hadn't tested it.

The Making Money Tutorial tile has similar phantoms:

 

In this case, I hadn't done anything at all in this tile when I loaded it. What I did was to bulldoze all the dirty industry while the game was paused, and saw that phantom I-D capacity was left over (the capacity dataview updated instantly without me needing to unpause). I unpaused and the industry regrew, then I paused and bulldozed it again. Exactly the same pattern of phantom I-D capacity was still there, even after I dezoned it all and ran on Cheetah for a while.

Your second test suggests that Maxis may have changed the number of jobs in one or two of the dirty industry buildings after creating these tutorials, and that is what has caused the bug - when they are bulldozed the new amount of I-D capacity was removed, but the save file still had the old amount.

I just reloaded, and this is what was there:

 

Those chemical tanks are the one building that is common to all of the tracts where phantom capacity appears.

So, as you say, this is probably yet another reason to be careful about using buildings with changed properties in tiles where they are already there.

[StarlitBeach 160]

I actually discovered another bug today which I don't think has been discussed before (hope this doesn't become a habit! ) This one probably can't be completely fixed though.

Like the industry slope effect bug, it is in the desirability calculations. Amongst the factors for R is proximity to other R of each wealth level. In theory, they prefer to be near other R of the same wealth. The problem is, the game doesn't actually calculate this proximity - it always looks like this in the query.txt file:

| Desirability equation for R$
|   desirability = base value: 25
|   + land value effect, f(value: 190): 1
|   + slope effect, f(value: 8.7): 0
|   + R$ proximity effect, f(0): 5
|   + R$$ proximity effect, f(0): -5
|   + R$$$ proximity effect, f(0): -5
|   + Co$$ proximity effect, f(0): 0
|   + Co$$$ proximity effect, f(0): 0

Even if the nearest R$$$ is the other side of the tile, or there are no R$$$ in the tile at all, proximity is still 0 and the desirability effect for other wealth types is still -5. So all these factors do is subtract 5 from all residential desirability! Commercial also has these proximity factors - they should prefer to be near R and CO of the same wealth level - but in this case it has zero effect. The only 'fix' would be to change the residential developer exemplars to disable the proximity effects completely.

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

2 minutes ago, StarlitBeach said:

Amongst the factors for R is proximity to other R of each wealth level. In theory, they prefer to be near other R of the same wealth.

I wasn't aware of it via the advanced query you show, but I recall in some other thread in the past couple or three years there was an idea to alter those such that each of the three Rs would prefer their own kind and abhor the others. (The idea was to keep them separated without messing with taxes to alter demand.)

I remember messing around with the exemplars and as I recall no matter how I changed those it didn't seem to make any difference in the game. Ofc, it might be one of those things where the factor is so minuscule that it just didn't have a noticeable affect on the outcome.

[StarlitBeach 160]

9 minutes ago, CorinaMarie said:

I wasn't aware of it via the advanced query you show, but I recall in some other thread in the past couple or three years there was an idea to alter those such that each of the three Rs would prefer their own kind and abhor the others. (The idea was to keep them separated without messing with taxes to alter demand.)

I remember messing around with the exemplars and as I recall no matter how I changed those it didn't seem to make any difference in the game. Ofc, it might be one of those things where the factor is so minuscule that it just didn't have a noticeable affect on the outcome.

Now that you mention it, I have a vague memory of reading that thread - I'll have to see if I can find it. It would be nice if they did have some effect, but it looks to me as if they can't.

[StarlitBeach 160]

I've finished testing - the main thing I was checking was the calibration of the colour scales, and I'm now sure they are correct - so it should be ready to publish soon! It will have the full version, plus custom installation options:

• the Capacity views by themselves, in separate Low, Medium and High versions for each developer type (R, C, I and Ag), which can be mixed as needed
• a full set of Desirability views, in case some people don't want the Capacity ones or want to switch between them
• files to replace the other dataviews in their original locations, to be used with either of the first two options

Plus a choice of colour scales for each - the current colours and a version that should be easier for people with red/green colour-blindness.

Pulling it all together and testing that the installation options work properly will take a bit of time, but hopefully some time over the weekend it will be ready.

I'm thinking of leaving out the CO$$$ rezoning targets view, or maybe including it with the full set of Desirability views (in place of Cs$). After testing it some more I'm not convinced that it works well enough to justify its slot. There are just too many false negatives - here's an example:

 

Those houses in the centre look a promising target for CO$$$, but not quite there yet. If they were coloured magenta then CO$$$ could grow immediately. Maybe if we put one more plaza nearby...

Except that the uninterpolated desirability view shows that they are already desirable enough:

 

And when they are rezoned to C, a high wealth office grows immediately:

 

The problem is that quantizing the data to lots automatically interpolates it, even if you set the interpolation property to false. The averaging of nearby tracts that is done by the interpolation causes it to look less desirable than it really is.

In fact, I think I will also include a set of uninterpolated dataviews - they are not very pretty, but they are the only truly accurate reflection of the underlying state of the simulation, which I'm sure at least some people would be interested to see.

Here's another example of what can happen when data is interpolated or quantized, this time for Average Age:

 

Uninterpolated

 

Interpolated

 

Quantized

 

The quantized view shows average age noticeably lower than it really is in many places, especially along some of the edges. Look at the left hand edge just above the start of the menu in particular - a row of lots that are light red or white in the quantized view, but in a tract that is light green in the uninterpolated view.

[Iodyne 36]

4 hours ago, CorinaMarie said:

^ (And yes, I deliberately changed the city tile name to an invisible non breaking space so it doesn't show at the region screen.)

Is this different from just turning off city names in the region view? Or is it to selectively hide some city tiles while not others? For posterity, which char might that be?

 

1 hour ago, StarlitBeach said:

The problem is that quantizing the data to lots automatically interpolates it, even if you set the interpolation property to false. The averaging of nearby tracts that is done by the interpolation causes it to look less desirable than it really is.

In fact, I think I will also include a set of uninterpolated dataviews - they are not very pretty, but they are the only truly accurate reflection of the underlying state of the simulation, which I'm sure at least some people would be interested to see.

That's unfortunate. Yeah I think having an uninterpolated set and a disclaimer on the quantized views should be fine. People can mix and match them too.

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

2 minutes ago, Iodyne said:

Is this different from just turning off city names in the region view? Or is it to selectively hide some city tiles while not others? For posterity, which char might that be?

Yes, it is different in this specific case.

Within each tutorial city's save data it's somehow different such that turning the names off in the region view doesn't work for those. So, as an alternative, I just named them by using the whererufrom cheat (with the city tile loaded) by holding the Alt key and typing 0160 on the number pad then releasing the Alt key.

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

20 hours ago, StarlitBeach said:

Those chemical tanks are the one building that is common to all of the tracts where phantom capacity appears.

You've definitely identified the culprit!

Pre-Expansion:

With Rush Hour / Deluxe:

 

[StarlitBeach 160]

I've added a couple more replacement dataviews to the custom installation options:

Mayor Rating

 

Fire Hazard

 

The percentages in the Fire Hazard view refer to the chance of a fire starting when ignited, according to the Percent Fire Start vs. Flammability property in the Flame simulator exemplar.

One or other of these will also be included in the full installation (where Radiation is) as I've decided to remove the CO$$$ rezoning targets view. At the moment I have Mayor Rating there, but I could change my mind. Which one do people pay more attention to?

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

2 hours ago, StarlitBeach said:

Which one do people pay more attention to?

I personally don't use Mayor Rating at all since I have something else in that slot. I do use the Fire Hazard view.

[StarlitBeach 160]

The Fire Hazard view seems to be potentially a bit more useful when it isn't quantized or interpolated, because it is able to show the flammability of individual cells:

 

Here's a slightly closer look:

This shows the effect of trees on flammability:

• streets have no flammability rating so they are transparent, but street trees do, so the street cells with trees appear in blue
• the graveyard to the northeast is surrounded by trees, whereas the one to the soutwest has only a few cells with trees around it

The graveyards and some of the gardens also show how it is able to distinguish between the parts of a lot that are more flammable (i.e. the buildings) and parts that are less flammable. The gardens which appear in darker blue are those without trees - gardens with trees are more flammable so they don't stand out from the buildings.

@CorinaMarie This might be useful for your abandoned buildings dataview? I was rereading the thread where you were testing it yesterday and one of the problems was false negatives caused by flammability being averaged over large lots with small buildings. Turning off quantization might solve that, though I haven't tested it.

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

2 hours ago, StarlitBeach said:

The Fire Hazard view seems to be potentially a bit more useful when it isn't quantized or interpolated, because it is able to show the flammability of individual cells:

I like your idea.

I'd have to peek in my own version, but in the game it looks like I might already be doing that:

 

2 hours ago, StarlitBeach said:

@CorinaMarie This might be useful for your abandoned buildings dataview? I was rereading the thread where you were testing it yesterday and one of the problems was false negatives caused by flammability being averaged over large lots with small buildings. Turning off quantization might solve that, though I haven't tested it.

Oooo! That might indeed help it.

I do use my Abandoned View all the time, but really only because I like it so much better than Zones view when I'm zoning as it lets me see all the development without the trees in the way. I generally don't have any trouble with mass exodus since I play slow and keep everything in balance.

The original idea was to create a mod for other peeps who do have severe instances of vast abandonment, but it just didn't seem to be worthwhile to anyone so I didn't pursue it any further than that old thread. Then, too, my mucking around with the Flammability Simulator was a turn off for most peeps and actually interferes with someone else's Lots of Fires (or whatever it was named) mod. (I did later create my own extra fire likelihood mod where I went about it in a completely different way so the fire stations themselves didn't need tweaked, but I only use that myself.) Also, my Abandoned view only applies to new development after installing so it's no help for peeps who already have a problem.

If you feel like tweaking and testing my mod, you are more than welcome to and to post any final version you create (and, ofc, any test versions).

Edit: I'll beep you, @StarlitBeach so you'll know I added this edit.

It just occurred to me that maybe your views with the Occupancy could well serve to show abandoned buildings by using bright red for zero, but only for existing lots? Perhaps as a separate view where all zero for lots have color and the rest are transparent? This would then work for all preexisting city tiles in a way my mod never could.

[StarlitBeach 160]

3 hours ago, CorinaMarie said:

The original idea was to create a mod for other peeps who do have severe instances of vast abandonment, but it just didn't seem to be worthwhile to anyone so I didn't pursue it any further than that old thread. Then, too, my mucking around with the Flammability Simulator was a turn off for most peeps and actually interferes with someone else's Lots of Fires (or whatever it was named) mod. (I did later create my own extra fire likelihood mod where I went about it in a completely different way so the fire stations themselves didn't need tweaked, but I only use that myself.) Also, my Abandoned view only applies to new development after installing so it's no help for peeps who already have a problem.

If you feel like tweaking and testing my mod, you are more than welcome to and to post any final version you create (and, ofc, any test versions).

What I was thinking of doing for my own setup was to make a combined Fire Hazard and Abandonment dataview. I do sometimes see R$$ abandon because they can't find jobs, if I'm not careful enough about keeping the pace of job creation in line with the pace of R$$ development. It usually happens on a small enough scale that I'll know where the abandoned buildings are, so maybe don't really need a dataview to tell me, but its still more useful than the Mayor Rating view. If I'm right in thinking that the non-quantized version can show the flammability of buildings separately from grounds, it should be easy to get it to show abandoned buildings (in black) because they should all have a flammability of 255 with your mod. I'll test it out a bit later and post the results here.

 

3 hours ago, CorinaMarie said:

It just occurred to me that maybe your views with the Occupancy could well serve to show abandoned buildings by using bright red for zero, but only for existing lots? Perhaps as a separate view where all zero for lots have color and the rest are transparent? This would then work for all preexisting city tiles in a way my mod never could.

I'll give this a try as well, and test the two approaches (occupancy vs. flammability) side by side.

[StarlitBeach 160]

I've played around a bit more with Occupancy, and I don't think it can be used to show abandoned buildings because:

• it shows the data in tracts, so it won't highlight a tract containing an abandoned building if the rest of the buildings in it are occupied
• it uses the same data sources as Desirability and Capacity, so only one developer type can be shown at a time
• tracts without any buildings of the developer type also show as zero occupancy, and
• quantizing doesn't help much with the above because you can't quantize by wealth level

The combined Fire Hazard and Abandonment view is much more promising though...

 

Quote

 

"Um, did you just bulldoze all our water pumps?"

"Is that what those things were? My friends were complaining about the noise from them... Ah well, what's the worst that could happen?"

"..."

 

 

 

Two months later, strange symbols started hovering above some buildings.

(Flammability has increased citywide, but nobody has abandoned yet.)

 

A few months after that, half of the population mysteriously disappeared.

(Lots of buildings have abandoned and are looking distressed, but they haven't fully abandoned yet, so no significant changes in flammability.)

 

Four months later the abandoned buildings looked even more dilapidated and started making ominous creaking sounds.

(Fully abandoned buildings now have very high flammability, shown in yellow.)

 

Quote

"Alright, you win. I'll get one of those large water pumps built. Hehe, maybe next to my brother-in-law's house..."

(Three months later, some buildings have reoccupied and flammability is back to normal, except for buildings that are still empty.)

 

It does seem to be able to highlight all buildings that have been abandoned. Here's a close up of some 1x1 sheds and other I-D buildings that needed water:

 

And another showing an abandoned office building on a lot with lower flammability. The parking garage and grounds are either transparent or blue, but the building is yellow:

 

Finally, an abandoned mansion showing the same effect:

 

I didn't spot any abandoned buildings (either looking dliapidated or with No Water zots) that were not highlighted. The abandoned buildings do seem to all have a flammability of 255. I initially set up the colour scale to show only 255 flammability in yellow, and the same buildings were highlighted. But when the buildings were watered again their flammability decreased so they weren't highlighted any more, though they were still empty. At the moment it's set up to highlight flammability above 160, and that seems to work well (160 flammability is the point at which the chance of a fire starting reaches the cap of 50%, and I believe it is much higher than any Maxis building, so there should be no false positives).

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

8 minutes ago, StarlitBeach said:

The combined Fire Hazard and Abandonment view is much more promising though...

Excellent. That's very encouraging what you've created. From there it could then optionally be a dedicated Abandoned view by setting everything below 160 to transparent.

[Cyclone Boom 16,875]

@StarlitBeach

Superb research and testing once more. This is top-notch modding and exploring you're doing here.

It'll very much come in useful with seeing these newly tailored views for gaining crucial gameplay insights.