tez

I think distinguishing styles only make sense if it is likely that they will exist within the same city, otherwise the players could just swap their plugin folder. For example I doubt someone wants to have a Mediterranean, Soviet, and a Japanese quarter in one city. Either a player will build an exclusively Mediterranean, Soviet, or Japanese city (and they can do that by swapping out their plugin folder, no styles needed) or they don't care about realism and just build everything at once (and thus won't need styles either). The W2W idea I like a lot however, because it is very likely that a player wants to develop one part of the town with W2W bats, but disable them for the rest of the town, which will be easy to do with styles. And I would expand on that idea by suggesting that in addition to a W2W style, there should be a style for Diagonal overhanging bats, and maybe even for Fractional Angle overhanging bats (though I'm not sure such bats exist yet). Another thing I would like to see is a medieval, or "pre-industrial" style. That would allow players to for example build an old city center with only that style enabled, then they can make all those buildings historical, switch to contemporary styles and continue building a modern city around the old city center. This "medieval/pre-industrial" style wouldn't even need to be from a specific region (e.g. Europe) since a Japanese player could use it just as well for old Japanese city centers in modern Japanese cities. The decision if the buildings are European or Japanese is probably a city-wide decision for most players and could be done with the plugin folder, while the decision if the buildings are new or old will be made within a city and therefore should be done with styles. So I would suggest these styles: - several styles separated by time (e.g. pre-1500, Renaissance, Modernism, Contemporary) - W2W styles (maybe again several styles separated by time) - Diagonal bats style(s) - (FA style) - leave one unspecified style that players can experiment with themselves - ofc the 4 original Maxis styles remain unchanged for backwards compatibility TL;DR: If we can expect it to coexist within the same city, it should be a style. If it will be the same within the whole city, then it should be a matter of swapping plugin-folders.

Just a RHW-6S×RHW-6S Cloverleaf with collector/distributor roads loosely based on @LucarioBoricua's tutorial:

I can only imagine what kind of animations might be possible. Here is a first demonstration: building: The Living Mall Pitch angle: default Yaw angles: from -120 (inclusive) to 180 (exclusive) in increments of 1 Those 300 screenshots (one for each angle) are then rendered at 25 fps for 12 seconds of video. Software used: SimCity 4 (duh), AutoHotkey v2, Shutter Encoder

I attempted to make the smallest possible cloverleaf. First pic is Lucario's version as reference. The screenshots are aligned I wonder if this is already the limit or if it can be made even smaller (while still being functional ofc) (Maxis prefab doesn't count) Also, here is my attempt at the smallest possible trumpet: It looks very ugly, also I used on-slope height transitions on even terrain, but function > form

I got two more questions: There's a HSRP line connecting the two Interchange tiles. There is no second HSRP line in Interchange A though. So I guess it just doesn't have to be connected to anything in A? Second question: Interchange A requires Hybrid Railway to cross water. I had multiple ideas how to do this, but none worked: Rail bridge or Monorail bridge. Doesn't work, because rail bridges have no monorail paths and monorail bridges have no rail paths. Perhaps in the far future this could be added to the NAM Underwater tunnel. Doesn't work for the same reasons. Will never be modded either, since iirc tunnels are .exe stuff, not .dat stuff. with a station, separate HRW into rail and monorail, then build separate bridges/tunnels for those. Probably not allowed because a station is not an interchange. Also with that logic, all RHWs could be "connected" simply by placing a subway station at every RHW neighborhood connection stump, then connecting the stations underground. Fake tunnel using the HRW Subway Converter as tunnel portal. Not allowed because of Rule 4: "You can use mods that only alter the aesthetics of the terrain, tree and water" build a dam with HRW on top. Probably not allowed because of Rule 3: "Other kinds of terraforming are allowed within reason, so long as the original shape / layout of the terrain is recognizable". Also the waterways could be considered a network as well, and a dam would separate those. something something DBE. Doesn't work. First of all, DBE is incompatible with RRW (which is mandatory in NAM), because the RRW override the DBE, so you can't build rail bridges anymore. Second, even if you remove NAM (except RHW and HSRP because you want to keep those intact in your city tile) from your plugin folder and build a DBE maxis rail on pillars, then put NAM back into your plugin folder, which turns the DBE maxis rail on pillars into DBE RRW on pillars and then plop the HRW puzzle pieces on the RRW, then for some reason that only removes the pillars (RRW is now floating) but doesn't apply the monorail paths or HRW catenary props. I Might add a screenshot later. So yeah, for now I say it's impossible. But I will do more testing.

I don't quite understand the task of the challenge. Is the goal to just build an Airport/Intersection/Seaport or also build an entire (realistic looking) city which includes the Airport/Intersection/Seaport? While Airports and Seaports irl are usually in or next to large cities, Highway Intersections can also often be found right outside a city.

and why don't you use an impossible layout for SAM-6 rather than just a difficult layout?

I've had a weird appearance of a SAM-6 street near diagonal roads even though I didn't place any starter pieces. (1) build 2 diagonal roads like so: (2) Build a street through the curve tile of the road The street in question turns into a SAM-6 street even though no starter pieces were involved. Also the roads don't connect to the street. Bulldozing one of the roads next to it turns the SAM-6 street into a normal street, as it should be. Maybe this is an error in the RUL file? Or maybe it's just a bug on my part idk. I have EU textures installed, in case that plays a role. If this isn't the right thread feel free to move my post.

Just one more lane bro. It's gonna fix all the traffic, I promise! Admittedly, my version looks pretty ugly. But if the textures would only be a bit shifted, the road marks of the two central lanes would be visible making it look better. This made me think: The "RHW12, 14, 16, 18, 20 etc..." probably would all require their own starters pieces, on- and off- ramps, curves, height and width transitions, cosmetic pieces, over- and underpasses, etc. If the textures were changed a bit, the RHW14, 16, 18, 20 could all be programmed in such a way that they only use already existing textures and game logic. Otherwise I fear the amount of custom intersections (remember: every draggable on and off- ramp is actually a custom intersection) would make the mod loading times explode. This might be an idea for the devs to have a modular system to build the different RHW networks on without having to implement every future RHW type manually.

In general I think there are many different networks in the Network Addon Mod, however they aren't really compatible with each other. This makes the whole NAM feel less like one mod and more like a collection of many smaller mods (which it indeed was). Some examples of combinations that the NAM currently doesn't allow yet afaik: any elevated RHW over Tram/GLR, let alone Tram in Street/Road/Avenue Ped Footbridge over RHW, STR, SAM elevated HSR over Tram/GLR and STR DDRHW over STR (perhaps this is a remnant of when DDRHW was rail based?) High elevated light rail and High elevated monorail over RHW, STR almost everything in over CAN-AM On another note I think it would be neat if: transitions from overground network to underground network (rail, RHW, GLR/Tram) had slope versions draggable roundabouts would also work on draggable road viaducts the 4x4 avenue roundabout with EMHW had a version for elevated RHW RHW flex height transitions on slopes had more versions besides the L0->L1 and L0->L2, for example L1->L2, L0->L4, etc., perhaps even 4 different flex slope height transitions, one for each possible height difference? The same for the diagonal versions

Admittedly, the following is more of a bug report than a request: Pedestrian paths (or whatever the technical term is) on diagonal streets are missing. Pedestrians currently can't walk from most diagonal street tiles to Pedmalls. In the screenshot none of these tiles offer a pedestrian path, so the sims take the car the long way around (it really is a long way to the other end of the city tile and back) But add one more Pedmall to a street tile with functioning pedestrian paths and suddenly the sims can walk to work. Using this method of plopping and bulldozing pedmalls, I came to the conclusion that the following diagonal street tiles don't work: 1: the diagonal tiles, the diagonal ending tiles, and the orthogonal-to-diagonal transitions (except the one I marked with the red arrows, that one actually works) 2: All T-intersections involving at least one diagonal road 3: these fancy draggable curves there are probably more diagonal street tiles but ofc I don't know all of them. Surprisingly, the draggable 2x2 roundabouts seemed to work. This bug is not present if the workplace is touching the street tiles, then they don't need any paths and can just enter from the street directly. Pedestrian paths on SAM: SAM is even worse, not even the normal orthogonal curve has working paths (I think this is the case for all SAM variations). It shouldn't be too difficult to fix though I think, just copy the paths from the normal streets to all of the SAM variants (assuming the corresponding tiles exist). Pictured below: Pedestrian living on a SAM street can't use the curve to enter a Pedmall

How to build a fake RHW-12S Idea: This RHW-12S, that I came up with consists of the inner part of RHW-10S and the outer part of RHW-8C. The paths look like they work, at least I couldn't despawn myself in the You-drive mode. It's very janky to build though, especially since FLEX-pieces try to "fix" my unstable mess. Also it looks ugly since the central line markings are cut off. Wouldn't recommend using it, but it works. If you need an RHW-12S, this might be the solution for you, although at some point in the future there will probably be a real RHW-12S available in the NAM. Crossing test with ELR, monorail, rail viaduct, EMHW, Road viaduct. Especially the rail and road viaduct are very unstable and tend to cause the RHW-12S to "decompose" to its RHW-10S and RHW-8C components. Having the crossing networks close together also increases decomposition risk, which is why I left at least a 1 tile gap here. How to build: (1) Place the RHW-8C and RHW-10S starters (2) Erase the unwanted parts (don't bulldoze!) (3) (not pictured here) Drag out the RHW

yep, found it, thank you for telling me where to look. Also while looking for it I stumbled across CB's threads about Cori's situation I didn't even know all of that, that's so terrible