andy33b

Originally posted by: SCkid Glowing buildings. i had that once i think. but i forget. I certianly hope that city was just like a test or something, because with all those utilities and expencise it's going down the drain fast!!! lol!quote> If I remember correct the glowing buildings were quite common in "good ol" SimCity2000... ..wow! how long a bug can last !

Originally posted by: Andreas Roth The "dirt road" we were referring to is an unfinished road system that was left in the game's files by the developers. The NAM team has made this available as "ANT" (Additional Network Tool) a long time ago, and currently, some members are working on a conversion to a "rural highway" (RHW). Unfortunately, we can't really use it as "dirt road" (i. e. with farm fields along it), since no development (growing farms and whatnot) can happen along this network. It behaves more like the highways (which also don't allow any development), so it was decided to use it this way. However, I think the "dirt road mod" that is available at the STEX works fine for this particular purpose.quote> Couldn't the "dirt road" be made the same way as GLR is done? Although the NAM includes GLR puzzle pieces, it doesn't exclude the regular el-rail. From my point of view, the only difference between "dirt road" and normal road is the appearance. Even the paths and vehicles that use them would remain same. ... not that I urge you to do it, I really would like to help, but with my two "random noise generators" (kids) at home there is barely time to even play the game.

So here are some questions for you: Would you like fully draggable GLR, with the need to bulldoze all existing GLR puzzle pieces and update all your GLR stations? Do you want to keep your current GLR setup, and use draggable GLR only between your stations by using the starter puzzle pieces? Or do you want to place the stations first, use them as starter pieces themselves, and drag GLR between them? Finally, do you want to keep the current textures, or do you rather like the ones created by goalio and ebina?quote> Since I already have used GLR extensively (without the use of GLR-Elrail transition) I would higly prefer your suggestion 2 or 3. Tearing down the station is ok for me but the whole GLR-Systems on every city... NO, that's way too much. I also would prefer the new textures.

Originally posted by: Pierre-Yves interestingly, with high speed rail, we might be able to replace normal rails with GLR, but what about el rail, can we lower el rail to ground level.well i thought this because the main purpose of building rail systems in simcity has now been replaced. quote> GLR is el rail on ground level! It is not a replacement for the normal rail, although there exist connector lots that allow the transition between glr and rail.

Originally posted by: Pierre-Yves interestingly, with high speed rail, we might be able to replace normal rails with GLR, but what about el rail, can we lower el rail to ground level.well i thought this because the main purpose of building rail systems in simcity has now been replaced. quote> GLR is el rail on ground level! It is not a replacement for the normal rail, although there exist connector lots that allow the transition between glr and rail.

Originally posted by: Pierre-Yves interestingly, with high speed rail, we might be able to replace normal rails with GLR, but what about el rail, can we lower el rail to ground level.well i thought this because the main purpose of building rail systems in simcity has now been replaced. quote> GLR is el rail on ground level! It is not a replacement for the normal rail, although there exist connector lots that allow the transition between glr and rail.

Originally posted by: haljackey Imageshack is evil to me because my game resolution is 1280X1024 and the pictures usially exceed the maximum size and/or memory, it only allows for 1.5MB when most of my photos are 2MB or more. Im uploading lots of photos because i dont know what will come through. I got some more airport photos as elisokool16 requested. Hope some of these come out! quote> That is absolutely correct. Are you aware that ST has the policy that your picture should be reduced to a maximum ov 888x600 pixels, otherwise they get deleted? Consider that quite a few people reading the forums are online through a nice old-fashioned analog modem (me included), where data comes in at max 56kbaud. These people will have to wait at least 10minutes only to see your post. Originally posted by: haljackey Most Of these photos will only show on internet explorer for some reason. If you are viewing with firefox, you may not see very many photos. Try to switch to internet explorer. quote> NO WAY... my dear firefox

Originally posted by: haljackey Imageshack is evil to me because my game resolution is 1280X1024 and the pictures usially exceed the maximum size and/or memory, it only allows for 1.5MB when most of my photos are 2MB or more. Im uploading lots of photos because i dont know what will come through. I got some more airport photos as elisokool16 requested. Hope some of these come out! quote> That is absolutely correct. Are you aware that ST has the policy that your picture should be reduced to a maximum ov 888x600 pixels, otherwise they get deleted? Consider that quite a few people reading the forums are online through a nice old-fashioned analog modem (me included), where data comes in at max 56kbaud. These people will have to wait at least 10minutes only to see your post. Originally posted by: haljackey Most Of these photos will only show on internet explorer for some reason. If you are viewing with firefox, you may not see very many photos. Try to switch to internet explorer. quote> NO WAY... my dear firefox

Originally posted by: haljackey Imageshack is evil to me because my game resolution is 1280X1024 and the pictures usially exceed the maximum size and/or memory, it only allows for 1.5MB when most of my photos are 2MB or more. Im uploading lots of photos because i dont know what will come through. I got some more airport photos as elisokool16 requested. Hope some of these come out! quote> That is absolutely correct. Are you aware that ST has the policy that your picture should be reduced to a maximum ov 888x600 pixels, otherwise they get deleted? Consider that quite a few people reading the forums are online through a nice old-fashioned analog modem (me included), where data comes in at max 56kbaud. These people will have to wait at least 10minutes only to see your post. Originally posted by: haljackey Most Of these photos will only show on internet explorer for some reason. If you are viewing with firefox, you may not see very many photos. Try to switch to internet explorer. quote> NO WAY... my dear firefox

Originally posted by: SC4BOY Personally I find the idea of sunken and ground rail to be a bit much... the liabilities and safety of 400kmh on the ground seems a bit intimidating from an operational standpoint.. but as pointed out "ve haf our vays!!"quote>The TGV (in france) and ICE (germany) lay on long (most?) parts on ground. They have a bigger amount (in comparison to normal rail) of bridges and tunnels on sloppy terrain since they have wider bends and low grades. Having made these rail streches all on bridges would have been much too expensive. If security is a matter place a fence in rural area and a wall in residential area.

Originally posted by: 3ddz Crossing two hsr tracks is a really difficult thing, since crossing at the same level isnt a good solution because it could allow collisions between two train.And overpasses are hard to realize since hsr trains cant handle slopes, for example here in germany a new train model had to be developed to use a new track with a slope of just 4%quote> A slope of 4% is already very steep for railways. The Gotthard line (Switzerland) has a maximum slope of 2,6%. Freight trains (even they don't take account in HSRP) already needs an additional engine to pull/push the weight up the slopes. To my knowledge overpasses can have 4% or more slope since they are short and trains can use their drive to handle the overpass. Throughout Europe leveled crossings on main lines are avoided at any cost. 1st they are dangerous 2nd they reduce the capacity. Near Zurich (also Switzerland) is such a leveled crossing (some remainings from earlier times) on two main lines. It reduces capacity by (if I remember correct) up to 20-30%. I would like to see flyover intersections.

I would have said the empty pages represent the missing posts that were lost during the transfer. The first post of this topic is (as I remember) by far not the first post it was before transfer. I have seen this behaviour on various topics and already reportet it in the bug-thread. Give Dirk some time to resolve the issue, he already did a big job... or wait until the new posts fill the blank pages.

Originally posted by: smoncrie I just did a quick test and I got it to plop properly on the slope on my first try. As far as I could tell, traffic also seemed to work correctly. I would need to do a lot more testing to make sure everything is OK, because I do not know why they were done that way.</P>quote> Will this be part of the new nam? Or could you make it as a special mod? Thanks

On various threads the last pages doesn't show any posts. Most prominent ist the "General NAM discussion thread" With 30 posts per page you get 111 pages but the last message is on page 108. In addition the first posts are missing. The first post it shows is dated 04/24/2004 from joexcooldude. If I remember correct it should be a post that has links to the other 2 NAM threads, being Tropod and was posted much earlier, somewhere in 2003. I have seen other threads that have blank pages, but I haven't checked if they are also missing posts. Did the upgrade process miss to transfer posts, or was it intended not to transfer older posts?

Andreas: Actually I live a few kilometers south of Germany, but as a good Grenzg