dustychicken

The only way I've managed to get past the terrain stepping that you have there is to dig deeper trenches. The 14/15 meter depth that the sunken highway digging lot goes to simply isn't enough to make the engine properly fold the terrain square. There's a sweet spot at around twenty meters or so that will make the engine do what you want, and you'll still be able to have a good looking sunken highway, complete with ramps.

Here are some shots from a city called Horn Ridge, which I'm no longer working on. It's my best city to date. The Horn Ridge skyline. http://www.coopofdoom.net/images/simtropolis/horn_ridge/image002.jpg align=baseline> Horn Ridge Political Plaza and Memorial Gardens http://www.coopofdoom.net/images/simtropolis/horn_ridge/image005.jpg align=baseline> Horn Ridge City High School http://www.coopofdoom.net/images/simtropolis/horn_ridge/image003.jpg align=baseline> Horn Ridge University and Research Facilities http://www.coopofdoom.net/images/simtropolis/horn_ridge/image001.jpg align=baseline> The HRU Hornbacks practice for their upcoming match against the Capitol City Bureaucrats. http://www.coopofdoom.net/images/simtropolis/horn_ridge/image004.jpg align=baseline> A solitary guard post on Ordinary Avenue, at the base of the Regular Foothills. http://www.coopofdoom.net/images/simtropolis/horn_ridge/image007.jpg align=baseline> No one really knows why that guard post is on Ordinary Avenue. There are no other buildings for a mile in any direction, and very few cars are seen passing through the gate and into the tunnel. What is of greater speculation is the occasional flash of blue or green light from beyond the foothills. Well, that's Horn Ridge. I might come back to it after I do a wipe and clean install of SimCity with a better plugin structure, but who knows. I would like to fill the map tile, so I just might start working on it again.

50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s vehicle automata, especially American vehicles. Chevy Bel Airs, Cadillac El Dorados, Oldsmobile Cutlasses, Buick Roadmasters, Chrysler 300s, Dodge Challengers, Plymouth Roadrunners, Studebakers, De Sotos, all those pieces of American automobile history. Maybe some dealerships to go with them, too. Oh, and weigh stations. The one weigh station that's on the STEX isn't quite authentic.

Haven't filled up for a couple days, and still have three-quarters of a tank, so I'm guessing here, but I'd wager 87 octane in Santa Ana, CA is somewhere around $2.80 a gallon. Which is highway robbery. My car gets about 11-13 MPG, depending on how I drive it, and has a 25.5 gallon tank. I typically put in about 17 gallons at each fillup, and that usually runs about forty-five bucks. It may be a lot, but I'm not giving up my Detroit rolling iron. Gas is way too damned expensive. Should be thirty-four cents for 104 octane, not this swill they call Premium.

I live seven minutes away from the Orange Crush, one of the top ten worst interchanges in the United States. Interstate 5, State Route 22, and State Route 57 all come together in this one spot, causing a huge backup on the northbound Five, both directions of the Twenty-Two, and southbound Fifty-Seven. It's even worse now, since a massive widening project on the Twenty-Two is causing traffic to be worse than it normally is on that highway. When it's finished however, the six lane highway will be at least eight lanes, maybe ten in some places. The Crush as seen looking southward. The Five is the main highway running from the bottom to the top of the photo, the Twenty-Two is the one running left to right in the middle, and the start of the Fifty-Seven is at the lower left. http://www.leightongeo.com/recrut/0753-Orange%20Crush-1st-Ed%20Andrews.jpg align=baseline> And here's a satellite image from Google Maps. The most dangerous part is the Bristol Street onramp to the eastbound Twenty-Two. Approximately two hundred feet from the onramp is the split off onto the other two freeways, and it's fairly hectic negotiating all the cars to get either all the way over to the left to stay on the Twenty-Two, or even just dealing with all the cars that want to get over to the right to get on the Five southbound. I've had a few close calls there myself.

Yeah, that's part of the reason I don't like newer cars. They all look the same! I swear, sometimes I think Honda, Toyota, and Nissan are all owned by one boring dude who has no sense of taste. At least the Big Three (Ford, GM, and Chrysler) are coming out with some fresh new designs lately. The new Mustang is growing on me, especially with its retro throwbacks, and I've already gone on about the Dodge Magnum. The new Charger bugs me though, since it's a four door and looks almost exactly like the Chrysler 300. There are some subtle bits about it that I like, like the agressive-looking headlamp assembly and the grille. GM needs to work on their designs, though. Even though they're different from the rest of the others, they're not agressive enough. The Pontiac GTO should be fearsome, not look like a Sunfire. However, that Saturn convertable looks nice, and it doesn't seem like it's that bad of a car. Small engine, but I admit, some smaller engines have some good pickup and go.

xiziz: I know and understand the concept behind crumple zones, and I realize they are a benefit to the unibody construction. I know that I'd probably want some in my car, and actually do have a couple places where the body will collapse and absorb impact. However, in the 70s body construction was still about big-n-huge, so my car's zones are just at the front grille before the radiator, and in the rear just before the fuel tank. However, the vast majority of accidents are not high-speed or high-impact collisions. They are fender benders, where speeds are typically under forty miles per hour, and impact is relatively light. I've actually been hit twice in such a manner, once rear-ended at five/ten miles per hour, and once clipped by a driver running a red at about twenty. Both times my car took the damage, and actually hit the other car back. I laughed when I saw that my broken turn signal cover crumpled in an entire door. As far as pollution, it's not so much a question of emmisions any more. Again, if an engine is properly tuned and maintained, a massive older V8 will produce emissions comparative to a modern engine with smog controls up the wazoo. They will consume more fuel of course, since there's a much larger displacement, but that's a basic physical requirement of such engines. It's when an engine is not maintained that it begins to produce excessive emissions and become a gross polluter. In any case, cars aren't the main contributor to the greenhouse effect anyway. The biggest one is the massive livestock farms, with all those cattle. Cows produce a huge amount of methane, and that's not regulated by the Air Resources Board. Heh. The SUV thing bothers me too, but mostly from a utility and common sense standpoint. They are useful out on the boonies, where you might actually need a large, high clearance vehicle to get around on rudimentary roads, but I agree that there is little use for them in the city. The vast majority of people I see driving these things are women who think they're safe, when they're probably some of the unsafest vehicles around. One t-bone collision at a high enough speed and that thing's going to roll, guaranteed. Personally, I think those women should just get one of the new station wagons that are available. Much lower to the ground which gives much more control and safety, while having the same or in some cases more cargo room. The Dodge Magnum is a good one, and has gobs of power with its emissions friendly Hemi engine. They just don't want to be seen driving one though, mostly due to the old idea that a station wagon has to be wood panelled and have an engine that's been repeatedly kicked in the balls under the hood. Hell, I'd drive one of the new Magnums if someone offered one to me. Those things are actually pretty nice. See? I don't hate all new cars.

ExiL3: Actually, most old cars aren't that bad at emissions, provided they're taken care of and tuned properly. The vast majority of the 60s and 70s vintage cars I see on the road around here (Seeing as I live in Southern California, there are a lot.) don't pump out gobs of smoke, mainly because their owners take care of them. A carburetor will never be as efficient or precise as fuel injection, but when properly tuned for the right air/fuel mixture the engine will burn almost one hundred percent of what it's fed through the barrels. My car, while a guzzler, has passed smog every year she's been tested. And for what it's worth, the gross polluters I typically see are the mid-80s to early 90s Hondas, Acuras, Toyotas, and Nissans that low-income people bought for a couple hundred bucks and never bother to keep up. Those things burn oil, have misfiring cylinders galore (Which effectively cripples the tiny four cylinder motor), and often have inefficient or just plain inoperative emissions controls. Those are the cars that should be taken off the road, but they won't be, because they're considered emissions-friendly by the California Air Resources Board simply because they're a Honda or Nissan. About the acceleration and speed issue, that's a question of the power-to-weight ratio. Modern cars have the benefit of ultra-lightweight bodies, which lowers the weight down to just over a ton or so. However, the bodies are very easily damaged because of their light weight. Older cars, while they are heavy because of the large amounts of steel, often withstand impacts much better because the bodies are so strong, and they're a body-on-frame type construction, not unibody like today's passenger cars. Lighten up that body by putting on a fiberglass hood, or ripping out everything but the driver's seat, and you'll have a car with a stupifying quarter mile time. Anyway, I'm getting a bit too edgy on this. I guess it's my denial of changing times.

JayStimson: The Challenger had a run of four years, from 1970 to 1974. The most powerful model year, and best looking in my opinion, was the 1970, especially the R/T with its dual hood scoops. In fact, 1970 was the peak for muscle cars. Chrysler had the Challenger, the Charger, and the Hemicuda, GM had the Oldsmobile Cutlass W30, and Ford was pushing its Mustangs like nothing else. Huge blocks, massive displacement, few smog controls...uNF. For all you naysayers about Detroit rolling iron and American muscle, just look at the machines. Not even taking into account their power, they look like humongous beasts, ready to destroy anything in their path. Put a Hemi, Max Wedge, or a 350 Rocket engine under the hood and it's a force to be reckoned with. You no longer just drive the car; you become part of it when you grapple with the wheel and pray the car wasn't going to buck you loose. These machines had soul, which is something modern cars severely lack. You can keep your ultra-modern computer controlled soulless hunks of plastic. I'll be smoking the tires and leaving you breathing raw gas. For the record, I drive a 1978 Chrysler Cordoba, which is essentially the luxery model of the late 70s Chargers. Only has an electronic ignition module, and that suits me just fine, since I don't have to diddle around with adjusting the points every five thousand miles. My next vehicle will be a truck from '69 to '74, if I can swing it. I've got a lot of projects going on with my Doby.

Pfft, modern computer controlled cars. All plastic and no go. This is a car: The 1970 Dodge Challenger R/T I'll take either the 426 HEMI or the 440 flavor. Hurst pistol grip shifter is a must. White, black, or Hemi Orange with black racing stripe, please.

I'm quite fond of American buildings from the 1920s to about the mid-1950s, especially the old Sears/Roebuck prefabricated houses. There are actually quite a few left in my neighborhood, between the more modern houses and such. There are a lot of those houses in old town Orange, where there's a massive chunk of the city stuck in the 1940s and 50s. Really fun to drive there. Essentially, anything that's post-war American suburb or big city.

I live in Santa Ana, CA., which is in central Orange County south of Los Angeles. The main drags through this town are the I-5, CA-57, CA-22, and CA-55. There is a notorious interchange here called the Orange Crush where the 5 and 22 intersect and where the 57 begins. It's in the top-ten worst interchanges of America, somewhere near the top of the list. Getting on at the Bristol Street onramp to the eastbound 22 is the worst spot, since the distance from the ramp meter light to the lane split is only 175 feet, at most, and there are three freeways coming together at that very point. Lots of close calls and accidents along there. The 22 freeway, also known as the Garden Grove freeway because the bulk of it passes through the city of Garden Grove, is the worst freeway in the county at the moment. Only six lanes wide the entire length from its beginning off the 55 to its merge with the 405 near Long Beach, and currently undergoing an extensive widening project. The eastbound side is almost always backed up, and during rush hour the westbound can be at a stand-still. The 55 freeway isn't too bad, but at rush hour it can be really bad, especially in the section between the 405 and 5 freeways. South of the 405 it's almost always a nice drive, since it's six/eight lanes wide and not much traffic goes through there. It also connects with the 73 toll road, which runs from Newport Beach to Mission Viejo in south county. North of the 5 freeway the 55 merges with and becomes the 91 freeway, which is one of the main routes to Riverside county and city, and connects with I-15, CA-60, and I-10. Interstate 5 runs the entire length of the country from the Canada border down to the Mexican border, and even extends into both Canada and Mexico. It was built to bypass CA-99, the old main route through Fresno and Bakersfield in the central valley In Los Angeles it connects up with US-101, and south of LA it essentially follows the old route of the 101 all the way down to San Diego. There are portions that deviate, and there are even old bits of the 101 still left and in use, but now they're mostly used as city streets. There's a portion in Mission Viejo just off the 5 that runs parallel to train tracks, and is referred to as El Camino Real, the same name of the actual highway. Down in south Irvine the I-5 and 405 come together at the El Toro Y , which is (I think) the largest interchange in America, numbering 26 lanes across at its widest point. It's a really impressive thing to drive on. In Los Angeles there are a number of really huge interchanges though, the most impressive being the East LA Interchange . Four major highways come together at this single point, the I-5, US-101, CA-60, I-10. This is personally my favorite interchange, since it has a lot of little ramps and curves and such that go under and over roads and portions of the other freeways that you're not connecting to. The I-5/US-101 connection is really fun, and has a great view of the skyscrapers along a part of its length. US-101 was constructed to follow the general path the Spanish settlers took along the coast, connecting every city that a mission was built in. It's the main route from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara and San Luis Obisbo, and was the main route to San Francisco until the I-5 was constructed. Now most people take the 5 to the Oakland Bay Bridge or one of the state highways before reaching the beginning of the bay, but I prefer taking the 101 all the way up. More direct, and much more scenic. The landscape around the 5 is just brown. Route 1, as known as the Pacific Coast Highway or just the Coast Highway depending on where you are in the state, is essentially a two-lane blacktop along the coast. It also shares parts of its length with US-101, but for the majority of its run, especially along the central California coast, it's its own road. Between Hearst Castle and San Francisco it's also a very windy and curvy road, and up along the coastal cliffs. Probably the most beautiful drive in the state, since it passes through rural farmland as well as hugging the coastal mountains. In the desert there's US-395 . This highway starts in Hisperia off I-15, just north of the Cajon Pass, and runs all the way to Canada going through California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. It's the main drag up to Death Valley, and is also a very beautiful highway to drive. Vastly different than PCH, because you're in the middle of the Mojave Desert, but I'm more of a desert rat than a beach bum so I like going out there. It's especially scenic around the Owens Valley. There are a lot of other highways in this state that are interesting, but I've said enough right now. California Highway Information/History: http://www.cahighways.org/ Los Angeles/Orange County Highway Information/History: http://www.scvresources.com/highways/la_highways.htm Greater Los Angeles and Orange County Traffic Conditions: http://www.sigalert.com Map of Orange County freeways: http://www.ocalmanac.com/Transportation/tr26map.htm Additional: Down here in SoCal we have a special term for a large or long-lasting accident. It's called a sigalert, named after Loyd Sigmon, an old radio personality who came up with the term to use in his traffic reports. Now it refers to any unplanned event that will last thirty or more minutes, and the CHP likes to issue them like popcorn. Here's a page on the history: http://harrymarnell.com/sigalert.htm

Hey mexicanboy, will you eventually be including the BART and Muni lines on your map? I was in SF just this last weekend and loved riding the Millbrae/Fremont BART line, and to a lesser extent the Muni N line to Haight from the Embarcadero. I don't think I've ever ridden a more pleasant mass transit system, and that includes the buses.

If your computer has 512MB or more of RAM, you'll do just fine running SimCity alongside the rest of your programs. I've ran SC4 with forty-five other processes going, and aside from the occasional blip, it runs just peachy. I've even switched from SC4 to answer some IMs and then gone right back to playing without so much as a hiccup. Windows XP, while still not being perfect with resource management, is still fairly smart about how to allocate RAM and CPU cycles. Provided you're not running an old or inadequate system, the majority of games will run smoothly, even with other running processes. You're making a big deal out of a small deal. Yes, themes do take up RAM, but if you've got 512MB RAM and a fairly decent CPU, you probably wouldn't even notice too much of a slowdown. If you don't have 512MB of RAM, then go out and get some. You shouldn't be running with less nowadays anyway. For the record, I'm running an AMD Athlon 64 3000 with 1GB of PC3200 RAM, and loading SC4 off an SATA drive at 10,000 RPM, so I might be a bit spoiled.