Tyberius06

Thanks The grain shipping was a CSX-Nexis collaboration, I found a yet newer file in the CSX UpdatePack vol03 which is dated for 17.04.2004, I am pretty sure @CaptCity sent me this version. The Hawkers was last time a LEX DVD file, that's some sort of civic health/reward file. I've attached the LEX DVD version of the Hawkers, and a slightly modernized version of the Grain Shipping here. I don't have documentation for the latter one, but the Hawkers will come to Evermore eventually in way or an other... @CorinaMarie I think that was a different situation, but I don't recall now You guys and gals may add attachments, I don't mind, just try to find the latest version of those and share those if it is possible. CSX Hawkers Organic Produce.zip CSX Nexis Grain Shipping RH_4c1d4430.SC4Lot.zip

Not to brag about myself, but this is why I do these updates and make decisions about these things (often after I was consulting with others; moderators, members, admins), because in many cases I do understand the why. The community has a 20+ years of evolution and history and connections/relationships and various intersite or onsite politics which I examined and investigated and tried to understand and learn. Like history studies... It takes time... That being said, most if not all of Matt's contents (RCI or civics etc...) were made by SC4PIM-X, which is the modern update standard. The only exception was mostly his transportation stuff, because the more recent changes in the traffic simulator and some further developments regarding transit properties (Switches and capacity) came around 2021-2023. There is a key point: SC4PIM-X (2010), that we use was developed by the BSC Team members and standardized some stuff the BSC-way. Like the civics, which has lower capacities compared to the Maxis values. I explained the purpose of this already (what their thinking was). From this there is a bunch of used to be intersite politics (from that 2007+ era), which were discussed elsewhere so I won't go into details. JBSimio, SimGoober, Deadwoods (and others) they started modding Simcity4 early on and mostly between 2004-2012-ish. The majority of their contents were made either with Maxis PIM or earlier development versions of the PIM-X or completely mocked up guess-numbers how they felt at that time. I had experienced that, that SimGoober commercials made or updated (by the BSC Team) around 2007 had different capacities and stages than the same commercials updated by the last 2010 version of the NP which was still maintained by them. So the "standard" is mostly the PIM-X calculations (whether you like it or not) that we use for updating stuff. Matt's contents were made by this standard, the others' contents were not, or only partially (even before my updates in recent years). Also it does matter, that while updating stuff, one use the proper filling degree (FD) for the volume calculation. The default 0.5 is NOT always the proper value (sometimes it's 0.1 or 0.68)... Let's not make this "them vs. us" discussion that would not be fruitful for anybody. I did not say that you need to make an explicit override mod. I said, that the updates will be made in a way which is "standard" and others can make and release whatever they want... It is a theoretical what if. Let's be fair, currently you are vocal about the high capacities, because it does not support your playing style and try to be vocal for others who might or might not exist, others were vocal about the maxis or even the lower BSC capacities because they wanted to support their 0-10 seconds skyscrapers and these lower capacities did not support their style. Where do you draw the line? We can not please everybody all the time. Currently the vocal majority is pro-CAM with all its benefits and disadvantages to others. To be fair out-of-box players will need to understand a bit the game before they start jumping into the modded gameplay world. The same way as certain people projected their vision (based on reviews and comments going around in the community) and made certain changes in civic capacities to fit into CAM gameplay, you are doing the same and mixing yourself with the out-of-the-box players. You and the out-of-the-box players are completely different, so you can only speak in your behalf and not in their. You wanted to make a custom version of the ERM that fits your vision... That's far from the out-of-the-box... If one wants to do out-of-the-box civics, then the Maxis PIM is still available... I tried and managed to restore as many model name xml property as possible so Maxis PIM can be used with most of the model packs where the models have the 0x88777601-G-I xml property. Little history: many modders and teams (BSC included) back in the days deliberately removed this xml property from models and model packs just to prevent others to use their models with Maxis PIM and generate their own building exemplars. SC4PIM-X bypassed this limitation of the Maxis PIM. You DO realise that SC4PIM-X has always been biased towards the BSC's style and standards, but what they did was that on one hand introduced CAM and its higher stages and unlocked higher building capacities, on the other hand did the opposite on the civics part and halved the stats. That was their way. Yes. You can make your own version and upload under your account and nobody will say anything. When we modernize and update stuff, it's not just about capacities. The older the contents are, the messier they get. There are tons of stuff to "fix" from inherited other 3rd party mods or inherited irrelevant maxis stuff, typos here and there. You can get involved, it's not like we are part of an elit club. Well, in those posts everything was written down. I won't repeat myself. I stand by my decisions and reasons there. That certain creator and I had a series of conversation of the situation which should not concern you, as it was not your contents and you were not involved in it. Please don't make wild assumptions on things that you don't know or don't see the full picture. We did not dodge any bullet, because there were no bullets at all. The situation with WolfZe was, that he was kind of taking 3rd party models from internet model warehouses, that he claimed as his own creations and tried to monetise them behind a steep paywall breaking both EA rules and the rules of those internet model warehouses. And the reason of the removal of those files was not entirely his demands, but the might be legal demands of those 3rd parties whose models he used. There was a reason he had to shut his patreon page down after all. Apples and oranges. It's never too late to learn new stuff, nobody was born with this knowladge out of the box. We all learnt how to edit certain properties and then experimented with them. They were never, as I pointed out above. Even the Maxis PIM doesn't have neutral values, it does have a bunch of broken ones though... So far I only heard complaints about that the new calculations (CAM) are forced to everybody, while it doesn't matter which calculations are forced to everybody (Maxis, BSC or CAM), because yours are yet again different, hence you are considering making your own version of ERM. So now what? Either way you need to do your own version for yourself (and you can share that with the community as a 3rd party mod) because you don't seem to be happy with any of the previous ones. As for considering every wishes and playing styles in the community, you need to stay on the field of reality... I/we can not do that. Do you have the capacity for that? Do you have the time? Do you have the motivation? Because you are also welcome to do 1-2-3-4 different versions to try to accomodate everybody, please everybody, share these on the exchanges and then everybody can cherrypick the version they wanted to use. Or one can learn and tailor stuff to their own style, but we are not responsible for that. So no, we do use a standard and anybody who is not happy with that can learn and make their own version. Well little history here again. CAM and non-CAM, yes. The BSC kind of did the same practice (that you are complaining about), when they moved/copied stuff over to LEX. They updated used to be non-CAM lots with the same TGIs to be CAM only. So when I started updating stuff recently, I chose to re-enable the non-CAM versions too. Where I could do it I used the original TGI for the non-CAM, but PIM-X'd version, while the CAM versions got a new TGI. HOWEVER, with IRM or non-IRM I don't have this kind of consideration. It was discussed internally and in certain cases we chose to publish non-IRM versions or IRM versions separately, but many/most of the udpated industrial contents are coming considering the IRM sorting method only. The PIM-X does not consider that by default; making lots IRM compatible happens as post modding changing the density as appropriate for IRM. Go for it if you wish, please. But please, don't put extra burden to anybody, act yourself. Don't just speak about it, but learn, experiment, develop, provide; come up with exact ideas (not just vague sentimental ideas), what and how you wish to see. Because your phrasing about neutrality (which has never existed in reality) is very vague... I quote this whole part, because it is just rinse and repeate of the previous things. As I said, there has never been such thing as neutrality in tool sets. I mean in the two main building creation tools, which are the Maxis PIM (pretty much broken in some way) and the SC4PIM-X (which worked for 1.5 decades following the BSC style and standard). These are the two global editors (Reader is completely different that's a manual tool with not much automatic calculations) and none of them are neutral. So what is neutral? How do we know that is right? That being said and closing this whole wall-of-text, @CasperVg, @Ulisse Wolf and I discussed the situation and the following will happen. The new SC4PIM-X 2026 by Caspervg will come with a revised new_properties.xml, which reverts the main capacities and calculations on the civic stuff to its 2010 version as this is still kind of a BSC developed tool and we are honouring their decisions, but it also contains advances and developments which are touching different unrelated areas. (The revised NP is already available on the github replacing the current one.) Although there are partial exceptions: Opera House. The student capacity says: <eval name="Students" value="max(SCCSOpera,50*int(10+Volume/120))"/> The SCCSOpera is set to a fix 25k as minimum in the config.toml, the separate calculation is measured to a PIM-X'd maxis opera house with a 0.6 FD (filling degree) and it would give around 24.850 student capacity. So technically it has an inbuilt OperaHouse fix. Also the Plop cost is set to give 68k. This might be going to be steep for other buildings. I'm not sure about this, never been, but the original PIM-X calculation would give even higher plop cost. The maxis Plop Cost and the OperaHouse fix plop cost is 68k, I tried to mimic it with calculation. the plop and bulldoze costs were based on capacities, I changed that to be based on the Volume (dimensions * FD). It just feels a bit more logical. The monthly cost is still based on capacities. The Private School has a new pre-set GUID (0x12121205), the new UI with the slider is currently in the Maxis UI Overrdies.dat, but later it will be also placed into the BSC Essentials. Currently nothing is using this UI ID. These changes kind of following RippleJets Maxis Private School with sliders fix. The new_properties.xml with the higher capacities for civics to better serve CAM gameplay has also been made available on github as New_Properties.xml-patches. These new_properties.xml files can be used with both old and new PIM-X by replacing the NP file in the install folder (old PIM-X 2009) or overriding the default one by placing a new version in %APPDATA%/sc4pimx/new_properties.xml, which will take precedence (new PIM-X 2026). The restored contents on SC4Evermore (and probably in general) will use the default BSC style calculation as it is described above; the necessary updates on those civic contents that came out with the higher capacities will be updated once again, and since we don't want to waste stuff which have already been done, both the CAM specific versions and the BSC style will be included or separately uploaded with a note, that only ONE should be used at a time and they should not be mixed and matched. That would be it... **update: The JBSimio stuff are not affected at all. They are running on the original BSC/PIM-X values as I see only the contents restored last year (2025) might be affected by the higher capacities like the SimGoober contents. So even less reason to worry...

Both vanilla and CAM style values/options can be added to the new-properties.xml, but the main question is what is default?! Because @Kel9509 even PIM-X 2009 (aka the BSC created/maintained new properties) did not have vanilla values. In fact the whole point was getting far away from the Maxis values. However as much as I saw and understood, the BSC used a different approach in PIM-X civics calculation, as I mentioned, because the goal/their standard was to push people to plop more schools if one reaches its limits... However that is exactly the opposite what many people wants (or at least a vocal minority). That's why there is a huge demand on radius doublers and capacity doublers etc... As I mentioned before in many occasions my used to be playing style was hybrid. If visually I need a school or want a school, I plop it, because I want it. Will it be used? Don't care about that. So in that sense I don't care about the large capacity and its effects on gameplay. But that's a personal choice. What we can NOT have is the demand for two-three separate override versions of the same lots: vanilla, BSC, CAM. That would be absolutely, total non-sense and completely unmaintainable... So in that sense first we need to decide that a common ground of values will be used for updating stuff that we/I restore, because I won't make 3 different versions just to satisfy everybody. I am willing to go through once more on the SimGoober civics and in that sense I need to update the JBSimio and some other civics too, because these shifts on value calculations happened in the past 3 years while the restoration also updated contents. However that won't make Mattb's stuff involved, that will still run on its originally set BSC values that came with PIM-X 2009. If someone wants to make a 3rd party override mod for that with whatever values they choose, be my guest, but needs to be a proper override mod. To be fair I don't know what all these controllers are doing and what's their relation to the education stuff. That's @Ulisse Wolf's project just like most of the modern CAM stuff. I don't understand why any farming stuff has any relation to these, but I am not developing these mods either. More deeply I was only messing with the Opera House algorithm in the NP, as I wanted to mimic the effect of the OH fix with PIM-X values. All these EQ boost and stuff like that are above my pay grade I have no interest in them, never had, never touched them and I don't even want to to touch them. Since I discovered that the base school values are in the config.ini and can be changed (see my post above), I am questioning whether the above showed quadruple effects in the calculations are really necessary there or it would be better just editing the base value in the config and let the other part of the calculations alone. I don't know. Consider this. Whatever values Matt used in his education stuff stay as is... Whatever other BSC/LEX related stuff have been/will be restored needs to use a common ground. I don't care what that common ground will be. Come up a sensible value/method and that's gonna be used for the restoration. Now besides this, we can add options to the new properties, BUT then if a creator release a new building model and they use CAM values, then whoever is not using CAM but wants the building, they need to create there own version, because no creator can be expected to cover all these options out of the box. I don't know if @CasperVg was able to add something to the UI, that by ticking a box an existing and a certain way modded civics building exemplar would be able to be updated and traverse between two or more pre-set modding options based on value calculations in the PIM-X new properties. So if one is modding something with CAM values and Kel wants them to have non-CAM values, then Kel double click the filling degree (in new PIM-X 2026) that will bring up comparison value editing window, there is a tickbox, now the program will call the calculations from the NP related to the command from the tickbox... I don't know if it will be possible, to be fair. Otherwise we need a default value. The stuff that we restore or PIM-X, will use this default value and if someone wants to deviate from that, they are welcome to do their own 3rd party overrides or ReLots.

which beach... do you have a link, where you downloaded from? It might be corrupted, or conflicting or just broken in some way...

@Kel9509First I have nothing to do with Mattb325's civic collection (with the education stuff) or other collections from him (yet), apart from the transportation collection, that indeed, I have updated. But I already mentioned this to you. Yes, I updated the SimGoober education stuff with the modern set-up, that @Ulisse Wolf tailored due to the CAM numbers and I trimmed down a bit here and there. Between Matt and SimGoober's updated collections there is a big difference. Matt's contents were modded by himself by using the original PIM-X calculations that the BSC came up with; they had a different approach in mind at that time (they lower the capacity, and the radius, so if a school reached its limits, the player was encouraged to plop a new school to fix that). SimGoober's educations were updated by a newer version of the PIM-X new_properties.xml, which considered more the CAM style playing; more residents, players will reach the school capacity limits sooner, and then they need to sacrifice real estate for more schools... Some of the changes came because of these "complaints" as far as I know. However.... I don't have the new_properties.xml in front of me right now (not even interested in editing anyhing in it currently), but IIRC the only things that Ulisse edited were the student capacity at first, then he and I started adjusting the plop, monthly and bulldoze costs and the civic jobs because they were all tied to the student capacity algorithm. His edits mainly contained a quadruple calculation to this student capacity (one of the base values in the calculation was multipled by 4, f.e. it started like 50+whatever and whatevery, and the 50 became 200). But because of this quadruple effect the costs and jobs properties got quadrupled too, that seemed a bit too steep. So in most of the cases now some parts of the cost and job calculations got trimmed back down with different division calculations, and also I changed the bulldoze and plop cost calculation NOT to be based on the student capacity but it's rather based on the volume of the building/model itself. The opera house calculations in the new_properties.xml are following a revised version of the operahouse fix itself. So all the new operahouses more or less start with the same base values that the opera house fix provides (including the query). So yeah, PIM-X has an inbuilt operahouse fix. I am not sure all the purposes of the private school and stuff like that, I've never been too interested in these. However there's gonna be one change that we are considering to implement and that's the implementation of the RippleJet Private School with Slider fix, that will bring a new UI (under new ID) for the private schools which have been run through or created with the new PIM-X. Now I started checking out the NP. These values don't come from us. Apart from the lowered EQ boost to 8 (that was 24 in the original PIM-X NP, I have no clue why it is now 8), however the other <!-- School Effectiveness vs. Average Age --> values were not changed from the original one. ORIGINAL PIM-X NP from 2010 Current Version of the NP: Speaking of it. @Kel9509, there is an ongoing development of a SC4PIM-X 2026 by @CasperVg, that we are discussing, developping and testing on a dedicated discord thread on the SC4Evermore Channel. You and anybody else are welcome to come there and make suggestions to that development, because after a while that new tool will become the "gold standard" for editing and custom content creation. About education a bit more. There is a "settings.ini" file in the PIM-X install folder which contains some basic stuff, that I was not aware until recently. This is an edited version, but you can see, that many of the school stuff has a base value in the settings ini. To be fair. I am not a CAM user, so if you or anybody comes up with a sensible mod that can be used with heavily modded (using custom contents and not just the Maxis stuff), but not CAM gameplays, I would go for it for sure...

+1 for uploading these old and restoration legacy stuff in packs. Thanks for the efforts

Very cool images and nicely designed airport! Great work!

Since others were very enthusiastic in the past few days and covered a bunch of those files that were on my to-do-list, I managed to upload all the files that were on my short term end (40+ files). I also updated a few other files that were not lost, but well overdue to be updated. I'll check Captcity's back up for further files in the coming days....

I've been cursing myself not catching up with the downloads since April 2024 (I am blaming @Haljackey , he was complaining about that he got too much notifactions because I also kept writing reviews on the downloaded items ), because with all my normal downloads for back-up I usually download a few of the sample images and make readme from the description page too... That would have been helpfull now...

I am a bit lost @CaptCity, @CorinaMarie and @Cyclone Boom. Is there thread where we note what has been restored?

I think I uploaded them, as they are in a project back-up folder that I use for fixed or uploaded stuff for STEX. I think there are around 50-55-ish uploads on my end, which was updated/uploaded in the past 2 years. Plus another 45, which meant to be replacing old STEX contents as their updated version got released on Evermore (not including the SimGoober stuff, which gonna be a completely different story eventually). Wednesday and Thursday I am gonna start uploading these (that's when I have off from work).

Wow, Happy Birthday, Andreas! Coincidentally, my best friend, who lives in Austria (close to the Hungarian border), is also celebrating his birthday (43 - he caught up to me finally) today! I went into a rabbit hole with this regarding most of the LEX/BSC stuff, so I would say, doing that kind of deep cleaning that I am doing not necessarily a worthy thing - takes up a shit loads of time, often demotivating. I updated some of the SFBT transportation stuff (I need to reupload them now - wednesday or thursday I'll have the time to do so) with current standards and with submenus, but I think there's just a few thing that I would consider kind of necessary to update in general: transportation stuff to current NAM standards ( @CasperVg is working on a 2026 version of the SC4PIM-X bringing it into our timeline, which will include complete and easy to use transit enabling, preset transit switches for most type of now "standard" station types and many other features - good old SC4Tool after 20 years of hard working can finally retire after the release of this), submenus for larger sets (parks or modular stuff) and the most headache considering that the SFBT made a tons of them, adding the w2w OG and w2w building style marker properties for the w2w growable contents... This can be a kind of copy/paste, but I know that there are a lot of w2w buildings in the SFBT collection...

Hard to tell. I checked Captcity's back-up and that contains over 1500 files, but he is meticulously downloading and keeping every updates/versions of these files also there is the case of the several DN/MN combos under one upload. Hundreds of uploads still, I think closer to a thousand. It's still much easier and faster than restoring the LEX where a bit more complex stuff going on (regroupping contents, creating packages, and checking and fixing stuff and checking dependencies and remaking readmes). In theory this can be much-much faster.

I need the actual file name and where you did get this file.

Former versions are generally available from the little menu next to the "What's new" clicking onto the "View ChangeLog". It was actually myself mainly who made the changes and Ulisse Wolf helped me with the uploads, because we started unifying contents between the former LEX (now restored on the SC4Evermore) and STEX versions. As you must be aware of that, that many of these files of yours were also released on the SC4Devotion LEX back in the days. There used to be that practice that CAM contents were added (often running on the same TGI as the non-CAM versions) to the LEX, while the non-CAM versions were kept on the STEX. Well this greatly changed in the past few years and we started merging these separated uploads into ONE pack for both exchanges. Also the CAM contents now generally have their own main/parent folder (CAM/Creator Name) instead of straight to the plugins as loose or under just the creator's name, so people can easily select/deselect the CAM contents whether they wanted to use or not. The dependenci(es) basically are the models from you into a collective AndisArt Models Mega Pack vol01, that was released on the SC4Evermore and the BSC Essentials due to the CAM UIs. Again this is a consolidation of the different lot versions that were released on the two exchanges. Both the CAM and non-CAM versions are using the same models, and since not necessarily both versions need to be used, to support the separate CAM and non-CAM versions which share on the same model files the common model pack made the most sense so things don't get duplicated unnecessarily. So instead of duplicating the models for each version, they are installed once from the model pack, then either or both of the lot version can be installed from STEX or from the installer (Evermore). So since the LEX versions of your contents were LOST and needed to be restored and since we want as less file conflicts and duplications between officially available versions as possible, the decision was made that we were unifying the two versions. Both the SC4Evermore and the STEX versions now have the same files and general folder structure, but the STEX versions are separate entries while the Evermore versions are coming with a cross-platform java installer based compilation. Also all these files were added to SC4Pac which again required some kind of consolidation. This has been a general thing in recent years, it is not just with your contents, but the amount you have is relatively small comparing to SimGoober's 200+ uploads where the STEX versions were rendered obsolete, but due to their amount it is time consuming to replace or redirect them all to the most up to date versions. But eventually it's gonna happen. Also in this case it was all about restoring the LEX contents, but since they were kind of parallels with the STEX files, they both needed to be brought to the same level. As for why we did not consult with you. Well, I do apoligize if this was unconfortable for you, I did not mean any harm. However since many people (including you) are coming and going often skipping years without any activity (think about it, these changes happened in last September - 9 months ago -, and you only noticed it just now that your files were updated) and many people are not even coming back at all nor responding to DMs or emails (if their emails are still existing), sorry, but I personally don't bother asking permission, if a person was absent for months or more than a year prior the updates. Because time is precious and waiting for months or years for a might be response is not viable. There are many files in generaly that are either broken or they have very outdated modding (especially the transportation stuff), where there is no way that I would start chasing the creators for response. Sorry. In your case it was about both restoring the former LEX contents and improving accessibility which is necessary these days, hence the further imporvements like SC4Pac compatibility. We have thousands of files over at SC4Devotion LEX that still need to be restored/rehosted (not to mention the SFBT contents, the SimCity Polska contents etc...) and some/many of them need to be updated because they use NOW outdated modding practices that now we know better, and in the most cases the creators are not available anymore at all. We just go with the flow. Kind Regards, - Tyberius06

@CorinaMarie and @Cyclone Boom I think the former old STEX links to new STEX links automatic conversion is failing. I have this link, and it leads to a 404 error: https://www.simtropolis.com/forum/files/file/26079-peg-spam-super-resource-pack/

Hi everybody! I have over 60 files that I uploaded or updated in the past 2 years, I start with those, then I am happy to help with whatever left... Here is the list that I start restoring from today. There might be more, but these were in my immediate STEX update back-up folder from the past 2 years.

I think we have the updates, that @Ulisse Wolf and myself were doing in the last year before your return. However could you "re-upload/upload a new version" of the latest Aig Tower? That was relased in december by you.

Ah this info I did not have. Yeah I deleted the banner on the other file and it made the download button available! Cool.

@CorinaMarie and @Cyclone Boom and @Dirktator Thank your for your efforts to bring the site back! Hm... I wanted to quickly re-upload those two files that I uploaded/updated since June 2024 under my own account (the other stuff comes later - I have all my 3rd party updates archived, I just need to find the time to re-upload them), and I managed to re-add the images, and I saw the files got uploaded, but on the download page the download button remained inactive saying that the file is unavailable. But I can see that the files were uploaded. Changing the file name is not helping. Ah, @CaptCity Good that I saw that you posted just before me. How up-to-date are your back-ups?

IIRC it is not impossible, but highly not recommended. I don't know the exact technicality around it, but I recall that it was not recommended making growable lots transit enabled for some reason. I think partially that's the reason that the earlier Jestarr industrial lots have many plop versions; one like a copy of the growable and other with rail access. Now that I think of it, something rings the bell, that TE growables would not get redevelopped when they get abanondoned (like due to lack of demand or other stuff). Plus first you need to lay down the rail tracks, then pray to whoever you wish that the intended lot will grow at that spot, or you need to hack a rail access to the lot. You can not draw the rail into the lot, because that would automaticaly destroy the zone and lot on it. I think some older Simgroober commercial lots were TE growables, but for their later re-hosted SC4D LEX versions the TE stuff was removed due to the above described reasons.

@kaimai Thank you for your efforts restoring these!