shmohel

Looks beautiful! Glad to see you have embraced the idea and that it is working out for you! I like the idea of depending on GLR.

IE users CAN see PNG. The problem is what I alluded to above. In IE6, there is no support for alpha transparency. Which is one of the great advantages PNG has over JPG (at least for web designers). Part of an image can be transparent and allow whatever is behind the image to show up. Problem is, that in IE6, those areas turn up an ugly gray color. This has been fixed for IE7. However, this should have no effect on their ability to see the images at all. And assuming you are just converting JPG to PNG, there should be NO problems.

Originally posted by: SimFox So for lazy/lay people PNG probably is the better choice - picture will be guarantied to look exactly the same.quote> Unless--of course--you are talking about IE6 and the damn issue with transparency. Granted it does not matter with SimCity photos, but I can't be the only one out there who gets PO'ed by this.

I can only imagine the look on the guys face as he was trying to cash this. Wish there was video footage. I think the best part of the whole article is this: Fuller couldn't be located for comment by The Associated Press on Friday because there were no phone listings for him in the Fort Worth area.quote> Hopefully, he was planning on using some of his "recording" business funds to get a couple of phone lines.

Or . . . http://www.snipshot.com

Yeah . . . Keep 'em stupid, Keep 'em thirsty. That'll do the trick!

Originally posted by: SIMplMn9or in a European city where planning went back thousand of years...quote> That's not an excuse NOT to use grids. Gridded city design goes back several millenia. The Romans were known for their heavy use of city planning twith grids. Why? Because it was more efficient for their army to build cities in preconceived geometrical patterns. Albeit London and Paris are not the best examples, in Europe there are plenty of examples of cities built with grids: Mannheim, Germany; Glasgow, UK; parts of Edinburgh.

If you are attempting to replicate New Jersey, take a look at the image on the far right here: That is the model that was developed and first used in the planned of Radburn, New Jersey. As you can see from this chart it is HIGHLY efficient in terms of preserving the maximum amount of space for building with the least amount of roads. Traditionally, the center areas are reserved for parks and walking paths.

PETRA There's something about an entire city carved into stone that I find truly magnificent.

pre-1950s (let the feud begin)

Hmmm. . . Glad to hear the congestion problem seems to be working in theory. One thing that might help is making those outer roads avenues. I love it that you tried with a Commercial area. I can't wait to test it out myself. (just need to wait for those pesky law school finals to finish up)

I think it might be worth exploring. Perhaps I will try using it in a CBD to see if I can prove you wrong. Sounds like a challenge! :-)

Originally posted by: Maxis92Actually, I saw your thread and it works very nicely for a suburb. You did a good job planning it too. However, it doesn't at all promote big cities with high density or direct-route mass transit. One plus a grid does have is better walkability so the person doesn't have to rely on the automobile. Really, you should be saving more space if you're building closely and up instead of out. quote> Absolutely! I agree 100%. The Fused Grid is certainly much better for suburban and residential areas, than a downtown commercial district. The entire point of system is to take the high points of various planning methods and "fuse" them. Therefore, it is a combination of the simple navigation, reduction of traffic in residential neighborhoods, promotion of communities/neighborliness, increase in foot traffic, reduction in asphalt (and its inherent negative enviromental effects), and an increase in green spaces. Granted not all this is applicable in SC4 since roads have no effect on ground temperature and water saturation. A properly executed system would increase walkability by having foot paths and cut throughs between the various inner roadsystem. This idea is called: filtered permeability. Simply put, vehicles are restricted from access, but pedestrians are not. This is desirable for many reasons, not the least of which is safety. So, the one point I disagree with you on is that a "strict grid" would provide greater walkability than the Fused Grid. Therefore, since the idea of the Fused Grid is to limit traffic and force it to travel on the periphery (thus being more efficient) it is not ideally suited for most downtown city areas. However, If a system were built properly utilizing public transportation, I think the system might be adaptable for commercial areas as well. Maybe not the most cost efficient for a SC CBD, but it might have its practical advantages in real world application. The problem I see is it would be very expensive because of the huge reliance upon public transportation needs. If cars are forced to a periphery, then people need great access from some other manner. Lastly, I want to make it clear that this is not my plan whatsoever. I am not an urban planner. Instead, I am simple a person interested in real estate development who did some research. This is the result of my findings. It stems from a dissertation put together by some academics and is slowly catching on in various communities. (I believe this is an area where those Canucks up there have been having great success.)

Efficiency in terms of space saving is what we were talking about. With a grid, to get people to the places they need to get to requires more roads covering more total ground space. If you want to delve further into the idea, then I suggest you take a look at the topic regarding Fused Grids. Simply put, higher traffic routes surround less trafficked routes. SimHoTToDDy has some great pictures of the plan in action.

Originally posted by: Streetwise Whether or not I grid depends on what my city-wide and local goals are. If I want a very dense population, I'm more willing to grid than not so as to conserve space, or get as many sims as possible in a small amount of space. If, on the other hand, I want something less dense, or something more asthetic, I usually grid a lot less. It sometimes comes down to volume versus beauty.quote> Grids are actually not that efficient in saving space. They waste a lot of space in roads. See below image taken from this article. http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/publications/en/rh-pr/tech/socio75.html I began a thread to talk about this issue.