cogeo

My guess is that this is due to inaccessible jobs, ie some lots that provide jobs are not properly connected. In one case I had one (yes one!) inaccessible small commercial lot causing no-job zots over almost my entire R$$ area. Check this post for more details.

You should be getting the overridden ones. Maybe the datpacked ones are loaded after yours, or you have another copy of the originals (in addition to the datpacked ones) which overrides the new ones. Easy test: temporarily give the new ones a different name/title, to find which version is finally loaded.

Interesting stuff here! Editing the color ramp can result in more gradual changes. Did the same in my Land-Value Dataview mod, and had to add more colors around the top end. Too bad though, that unlike Graphs, Dataviews, cannot be added in this UI, so you need to replace another one. Verified this, searched and found them in the executable, there is a fixed hard-coded table in there, so it's not defined in some external data file (.dat) that can be edited. Question: Those of you who have dug into the parks properties, do you know why the ingame parks all have the Park Effect (and Landmark effect) property set to max value of 100 (0x64)? Is there some cap there? Does it cycle if set above that?

Great work here! I tried doing some few things some (long) time ago, and here are some thoughts: - Tried adding more dataview radio-buttons (changing the UI file) but didn't succeed. It seems that, unlike the Graphs UI, the number of buttons is fixed, so a new dataview can only replace another one, it can't be added. - Interesting, there are two different datasource IDs for police and crime. Btw the ingame "Crime" dataview is kinda useless, as it only highlights the crime-affected zones and displays the police coverage, but not the zones they cover (or do not cover). - Same for fire and flammability, only the dataview does show some zone overlays here. - The datasource IDs are not consecutive, some are not used, and it might be interesting to check if they actually do deliver any data. I think a useful dataview would be highlight historical lots, or alternatively change the cursor (highlights) color when hovering a historical lot, but it's unknown whether such a datasource actually exists. I made a land-value dataview mod. The problem is the quality of the data delivered by the datasource: too much land getting the max value (255) and the ones close, with the rest being quite sparse. So the max three values (253-255) each needed a different color. Still, much of the land takes the max value, but this is what is given by the datasource, so there is nothing we can do with modding. Below is a pic: You can see the effect of the industry (red area at the top-right corner) and a landfill (yellow circle, again at the top-right corner), a major road artery (yellow line along the coast), health facilities (green circles at the middle/top-middle) and developed zones (much of this is maxed-out blue). Generally the city has a fairly high land-value because of education buildings providing coverage to the whole city tile (college and museum) - if I zone Residential anywhere in the city I will get "School Grade: High", although there is no "school" coverage actually. Now look what happens if I bulldoze the college and the museum: The effect of schools and libraries is visible, esp where it's combined with health, and the undeveloped land being much lower, with the effects of water (the coast) and elevation (top-left corner) now much more apparent. It's obvious that education increases land value much more. @CorinaMarie, since the thread has gone totally off-topic, pls consider splitting it.

There is actually a way to make a mod that will cause the vending machines not to be displayed, without using the Lot Editor and modifying the lots, which I would prefer. This is possible because the RTMT lots use the vending machines' prop-family, rather than individual props. You need to make a datfile. Here is how: Open simcity_1.dat and find the three vending machines prop exemplars. Copy them to a new datfile (copy-paste or select Add to Patch and then Save recorded exemplars->Create Dat). Open the new datfile, go to every vending machine exemplar and remove ONLY the "Prop Family" property. That is, the modified props will be differing only in that the vending machines won't be in the family any more. For gameplay: When you want to plop RTMT install the mod. The modified props will be overriding the original ones. The family will now be empty, so new plops won't be getting any vending machine. Existing vending machines props in other lots (RTMT or commercial or what) won't have any problem either, they will keep displaying the vending machines, as prop-family members are selected during plop/grow, but in each lot instance they are then referenced by prop ID and are thus not getting "lost", as the props are otherwise identical. For the rest of the gameplay (eg plopping other lots, for which you do want vending machines props, or running the simulator, which can cause C lots to be grown) just remove the mod. The vending machines will be again members of the family. A little more troublesome to use, but it's very flexible.

Umm, let me post a different opinion here. Not that what the other members posted was wrong, but I think there is another factor that causes your problem. After all, you do have positive demand, which means that there are more jobs than workers, either in this city or in another. Every worker should be able to find a job then. My guess is that you may have inaccessible jobs. You have many unidirectional networks, ie one-way roads and avenues, which provide access only to the one side and can be regarded as two opposite one-way roads put together. Can't see many details in the pic, but some of these industrial lots may just not be properly connected. Sims must be able to both reach their workplaces (morning commute) and return home (evening commute), otherwise they won't take the job. And if not, the simulator will stop examining alternatives, it will just display zots - I consider this a "bug". A tiny inaccessible building offering any kind of jobs (civic, commercial or industrial) can cause no-job zots over a huge area. The power plant you may have put at a far corner of your map should be connected at least with a street, even if finally the simulator won't send any sims to work there (of course, windmills don't need to be connected, as they offer no jobs). Take a look at the pic below, it's an interesting case: You can see two medium-sized commercial buildings along the avenue. But sims (originating from the same city) won't work there because they are both inaccessible, the left one for the evening commute, the right one for the morning commute. There are no alternative possible routes either (eg side roads or streets). These would have caused no-jobs zots over much of my city, with the residential buildings closest most seriously affected (the simulator searches for the "most desirable job", and this is usually the closest one). My solution is to provide some way for the sims to reach their job and return, and this is the street section you can see in the pic (I even placed it between the streetlights, so its visual effect is minimized). So I would recommend that you check all buildings with jobs with the traffic query tool, and examine the routes your sims have chosen. If you see something strange, eg circuitous or convoluted routes, but especially buildings with no sims getting there, you should revise your layout, eg have these roads or one-way roads intersecting the avenue, so that they connect to its both directions. Check ALL your buildings, even the tiniest, starting from the ones closest to the residential areas. Note: Similar considerations apply to the residential buildings as well: sims must be able to commute both from and to their residences.

As @rsc204 mentioned above, it's about what buildings and lot sizes are available for each given growth stage. And yes, Wren is a primary example, because it's relatively large building, with a fairly high number of jobs and a variety of lot sizes, including 2×3 and 3×2 ones. And as it is $$$ and stage-8, once grown it will never be upgraded to something else (unless of course bulldozed, destroyed by fire or abandoned and redeveloped), as there exists no other lot of higher wealth or growth-stage. Another known "pest" is Chalmers Co, a CO$$$ building with 61 jobs, NY style but grows under all tilesets, accommodated in a multitude of lot sizes. Having a relatively high number of jobs for its stage, it usually grows in large numbers (at least in my cities), but as it is a small one it is finally replaced by something bigger. It's quite frustrating though. Like what @madhatter106 did for small/medium CO$$ offices, I made 3 BATs to compete with this, and included them in the same building-family, so it can grow in the same (Maxis) lots. I haven't released them. Here is a pic: The white square building at the top-right corner is Chalmers, while the one next and the other two on the opposite side are mine. You may have noticed that the lots are the same (the one at the corner is different, but uses the same building family). Should I had not made them, they would all be Chalmers. And of course, then there is custom content. Many good BATters have made and released excellent BATs, but often paying very little attention to proper modding. Many have unbalanced stats and cause problems in gameplay, like growing too easily or too little to not at all, being unable to be upgraded, offering very few or too many jobs for their stage, consuming too much or too little power or water (or not at all), paying too high or too low taxes, etc etc. Therefore I always check and review custom content's stats before installing them. For example, @ILL Tonkso 's content is almost always badly modded, and the lotting work is almost inexistent, having just the lot textures. Apparently he didn't like modding/lotting work; he should have rather found someone who does and team-up. Another example coming in mind is NDEX Richmand Complex. It's a large (actually two) CO$$$ tower, with a large number of jobs, in a 4x4 lot. But... it is stage-5! As a result, it can easily overtake your city. It should obviously be stage-8, at least for the A building (the B one could be stage-7, but it could very well be stage-8 as well). So, if you get some buildings/lots growing too much, my suggestion is install custom content of similar sizes and stats, but always check them before installing, if they are in line with the Maxis (or CAM, if you have installed it) stuff.

As far as I can see from the graphs, you still have a lot of unsatisfied residential demand. All three wealth levels are needed for I-HT. But with the zero commercial taxes CO grows too easily, which probably absorbs all your educated workforce. And because you want to grow I-HT, install the I-HT R$$$ employment fix, as described in this post. And do it before you grow your I-HT, otherwise no R$$$ sims will be working there. The fix won't fix any existing I-HT development. You are right about the desirability factors. Low desirability can prohibit development of high-wealth (or even medium-wealth) buildings. But the OP's problem is mostly (lack of) demand. Without demand, no development takes place, no matter the desirability. And desirability doesn't increase demand. As for the temporary desirability, it's called "transient aura effect". I'm using it a lot, and I can basically grow what I want were I want (provided that I have the demand). Even made some special lots for it. If you are interested, take a look at my posts here, here and here.

Exactly, I mean new residents, not commuters. New residents (new R development, upgrade or re-occupation) have a default EQ of 20, 40 or 60, respectively for R$/$$/$$$ (you can see these in the Residential simulator exemplar - use the Navigator Tool in simcity_1.dat). Commuters are not "new" residents, they are sims living in another city tile, and have their own EQ level, assigned and modified by the quality of the education (or lack of) in the city they live. In the OP's case it is obvious that this much-wanted well-educated workforce does not exist or is not available - in the same or in neighbor city (demand in SC4 is equal in all connected cities). And the new residential development I mentioned (in any city) will bring in initially low-EQ residents. Note: I have found a method that can deliver highly-educated workers fast, and this is the upgrade of existing residential development to higher growth-stage but same wealth level. Seems that all new residents have the same EQ as the existing ones in this case. For example, if you have two stage-3 1x3 R$$ houses (some 12 occupants each), you can rezone for medium- or high-density, and if you have the demand you may get a stage-5 2x3 condo (some 150 res). Now, if the residents in the two houses were highly-educated (colored green in the Education Dataview), the new residents in the condo will be highly-educated as well! That is, 150-24=126 new ready-made highly-educated R$$ workers! The same will happen if the condo is upgraded to a stage-6 2x3 one (some 250 res). Used this technique this way: development of a CO$$$ building, causes CO$$$ demand to drop (this is called "satisfying" the demand) and R demand to rise, due to new jobs; this can cause R development, and if this growth is materialized upgrading existing R development with highly-educated residents (esp R$$ and R$$$), the new residents can cause an increase of CO$$$ demand, enough to cause growth of an another CO$$$ building! If the R development upgraded was of relatively high, but not highest EQ, you may get an increase of CO$$ demand instead.

From what I can see in the graphs and census data, it's not a caps problem, not low-EQ related, neither a desirability one (low pollution, garbage and crime). And with the taxes at 0%, it's obviously not an overtaxation one either. Btw I don't know, with the taxes set to 0%, what the development mix will be. I would try average to below-average tax levels, and see where the thing will settle - for the first 6-9 months demands may hit a low, but it will recover slowly. And it's not necessary to make permanent/irreversible changes to your city, you can simply backup the region (copy the region's folder somewhere else), to test a new strategy. As for not having enough I-HT demand, I have noticed that you don't have enough CO$$$ or even CO$$ demand either! On the contrary you rather have high residential demand, which you don't satisfy. This means that there are many vacant jobs, and from what I can see in the graphs many of them are for $$ and $$$ workers. Or else, all your highly-educated sims are employed in the existing office and civic buildings, there are no highly-educated workers available, and therefore you get no new I-HT and CO$$$ demand. So my suggestion is try to satisfy the residential demand first (grow more residences), esp the R$$ and R$$$ ones. And as a sidenote, do not snub C$/$$ and R$ development. At some point demand will reach a plateau and further growth will not be possible. New development - with the drivers now being CO$$/$$$ and I-HT - requires new educated and available workforce, which unfortunately cannot be "imported" (newcomers have a very low EQ), it has to be prepared locally. So you need full educational coverage - schools and libraries locally, college/university and museum (these have a citywide effect), and over time EQ will rise and so will CO and I-HT demand. R$ and C$/$$ development will provide the (initially uneducated) workforce and the jobs needed to support it for some time. So this kind of development is necessary to achieve continued growth for your cities, providing new residents and workers.

There are no 4-tile deep residential lots for the early, not even the medium growth stages. Actually only some stage-8 residential hi-rises are 4-tile deep, and these are not 6x4 either. And the simulator won't give you a residential hi-rise right from the start. I would suggest zoning some 3-tile deep zones, not just "some", "a lot" would be more accurate to say. These should best be the vast majority of your zoning pattern. 3-tile deep zones are very versatile, as they can accommodate lots of all growth stages: 1x3 houses (stages 1-3), 2x3 $$ condos (stages 5 & 6), 2x3 $ tenements (stages 4-7), and finally 3x3 and 4x3 hi-rises (stages 7 & 8). $$ rowhouses are stage-4 and grow only on 1x2 lots, medium- or high-density. A sidenote, this layout is wasteful and inefficient. Too many parallel avenues, ie excess capacity, the houses will be suffering from noise, and the commercial lots won't be getting high traffic (=customers) because it will be shared among the multiple avenues. For the residential area I prefer an "arterial" layout (low-capacity networks leading to high-capacity ones), and it would be best to funnel the traffic through fewer thoroughfares in the commercial area.

There are limits to the max deal amount, as well as the garbage that can be sent to a landfill. Capacity limitations (on the receiving city's side) won't let you exceed a certain amount, and this may also decrease over time, as landfills are getting full, or incinerators lose capacity due to aging. Also a city may not sign any deal (incl garbage) exceeding 2.5 times its "needs" (own needs + deals). So a city with much accumulated trash may take some time to clean completely. You can install GraphMod V2 (by Tropod), it shows a lot more information in the garbage graph, among others where your garbage goes. I have included a modified version in my incinerator upload (different scales for the "Capacity" and "Total Garbage" plots). At least check if total garbage and garbage pollution is reduced or continues to accumulate.

As other members mentioned above, the reason why you can't grow mansions on smaller lots is that they are stage-4 and -5, and thus require medium-density zones. I met this problem back in 2010, and made a mod for it. Check this thread post on SC4D. Don't know what effect this will have on an already developed city/region though. The mod changes growth stages for Maxis lots, instances of which you already have in your cities, and it is unknown what will happen if you change their growth stage, will it be OK or it will mess-up lot stage counters (sums), and therefore what the simulator will grant you? Also, I find the Less Abandonment Mod absolutely brilliant, not only it sets desirability thresholds to get $$ and $$$ in the first place higher (so they won't grow in areas of marginal desirability and then easily get abandoned/dilapidated), it also sets dilapidation threshold lower than the growth/recovery one, which means that lots can tolerate some drop in desirability (which is very much possible to occur, as a result of congestion, air pollution etc, as the city grows and becomes more dense), without suffering dilapidation or abandonment, and imo this is the key point. I use it in my cities (can't remember if I use it as it was originally or further modded it though), and along with some custom lots I made, utilizing the so called "transient aura effect" (1x1 "park" lots with extreme desirability settings, and zero costs, which you plop to get the desired development and then bulldoze them), I have been able to grow what I want where I want, resulting for example in completely segregated R$/$$/$$$ areas, or avoiding the "fragmentation" of commercial zones (eg having those nasty 1x3 boutiques, which they cannot be upgraded, only merged with another one next by to form a larger lot). But this requires a lot of marking historical and unmarking, saving the city when getting the desired development and exiting to region when not etc, which is... "micromanagement"!

There is no definite answer to this question. But it may be good to know how fares are calculated. Sims don't pay "entrance" tickets, and you can see this in all ingame (and custom content) stops and stations: the "Transit Switch Fare" property (which would charge the passengers served by the station) is absent, and the default is 0, which means that no "entrance" fares are collected. The only transit lot that does use (define) this property is the Tollbooth, with the value set to 0.1, meaning that it charges §0.1 every car passing through. Instead, fares are calculated based on the distance traveled ie "passenger-kilometers" in reality, or "passenger-tiles" in SimCity 4 . The property that defines these is called "Income per tile by travel type", and the description in the reader is: "Income gained for each tile: walk, car, bus, rail...". As @CorinaMarie posted above, these are set to §0.001 for ground travel types and §0.01 for ferries. So the fares you collect depend on the number of passengers AND the distance traveled. Eg 100 sims traveling 50 tiles would pay 100 × 50 × 0.001 = §5 fares. This would be enough to pay for the "maintenance cost" of a bus stop (duh, what a modelling design here!), but then... there is the bus stop at the other end of the journey... but that stop may serve passengers originating from/arriving to another one or other ones. So it's really hard to calculate fares based on the "usage" reported in the stops'/stations' queries. What is important is place transit stops and stations near dense residential and commercial or industrial centers, or selectively at isolated buildings located far-away (usage won't be high, but the distance would be long). As your city gets more dense, and you add more transit stations, usage will increase a lot. Also remember that R§ sims are very much likely to use mass-transit, R§§ ones a lot less, and R§§§ ones really very little. Finally, I would like to note that the modding done by the NAM Team in their "Traffic Simulator" plugins has skewed the car vs MT preference strongly towards favoring the car: The Travel strategy percent Wealth$/$$/$$$ properties triplets (MT/car/fastest), determining the preference for each travel strategy, have the car preference increased. Bus speeds have been set lower than car (in the original simulator settings it was the opposite). This was supposedly done for "realism", but take into account that in order to use the MT, sims have to walk some distance first to reach the stations (this adds to the commute time), while there is no any overhead for using the car (in reality they would have to park the car, let alone searching for a parking space in a congested city or parking lot!). The end result is that sims set to prefer the "fastest" option, will almost always choose the car too, and the bus will only be used by sims hard-set to prefer MT, and of course only if and where it is available! So, unless you mod these (and the preference properties I mentioned above) back to the original values, expect low ridership. A NAM Team member some time ago admitted that they wanted low, "American", MT usage numbers (again regarding them as more "realistic", as the original ones were considered too high). Sooo.... The "Travel type generates traffic" property for bus was set to True instead of False (originally). This doesn't affect MT usage, but there is no benefit in having bus service, at least as far as traffic/congestion is concerned. With this setting, 50 sims in a bus are thought to create as much traffic as if traveling with their 50 cars! I think this was done to increase commercial desirability (traffic=customers), but I also think it is wrong too: bus traffic seems to count as "customers" too, as do pedestrians. Hope this helps.

Your city is connected to other cities, so demand "extrapolates" between them. Demand should be the same among all connected cities. If demand has been exhausted (as a result of development or use of ploppable RCI in the rest of your region) or is negative, you will be getting no development. However, all these civics should have driven at least R demand up. And Agriculture (or they are Industrial?) zones should be growing too (btw that diagonal layout serves no purpose imho). So the first thing to do is check your demand graphs. Otherwise, taxes set too high maybe? And I don't know what that RCI mod does, actually I had never even heard of it before.