RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[ivo_su]

After waiting so long I do not even really care what is included or missing in versions 30, 5.0  and 2.0 just as only I need is to be in my plugins folder hour soon. Starting to feel like a pregnant woman in nine months - I know that  some long-awaited miracle, but patience  has long since disappeared. 

- Ivo

[Gringamuyloca]

  ivo_su  such a fantastic analogy! 

We are all waiting with bated breath...
Has the NAM team gone into "labour"?     

Who knows when the 'baby(ies)' will arrive??   

[Tarkus]

It should be of no reassurance to you, then, that I was a 9 1/2 month baby.

-Alex

[jondor]

It should be of no reassurance to you, then, that I was a 9 1/2 month baby.

-Alex

Same here. 

[Rady]

It should be of no reassurance to you, then, that I was a 9 1/2 month baby.

-Alex

Same here. 

Care to look for some "8-month-baby" team members ...? if that helps ..   

[jacksunny]

I was an 8 1/2 month baby 

[metarvo]

We've taken a real detour here.    Anyway, I'm getting excited just thinking about all of the new features that will be found in RHW 5.0.  I didn't even know what DDRHW-4 was back when 4.0 came out, and now we're even getting DDRHW-4 bridges.  This is a great time to be a SC4 player. 

[DAB_City]

I've followed this thread for a while now, and haven't seen anyone talk about it before,
but for me one big drawback is, that there are only straight transition. (specially from rhw4 to mis)
I have something in mind, I would describe as a "smooth curve rhw4-mis transition"-puzzle piece.
Is something like this creatable?

We'll probably get into some additional types of transitions after we release Version 5.0.  Likely, we'll start with start with fully diagonal and fully FARHW transitions (there will be a FAMIS-to-FARHW-4 transition in Version 5.0) before we really get into curved transitions of that sort, though.

-Alex

Will that include proper Maxis Highway<>RHW (6C/S) transitions? I apologise if this has already been bought up, but I am in dire need of these! 

[thornyjohny]

Will there be a Maxis Highway/RHW-6 transition?

No.

Is that another one of those "unsolvable" problems?
The Maxis Highway/RHW-4 transition isn't realistic, and it creates a bottleneck. I was really hoping for a fix in the next RHW.

Is that another one of those "unsolvable" problems?

The problem is that the models for MHWs are far too complex to work with, which is also why there's very few new pieces for MHW.

It's doable, but the process of making such pieces is time-consuming.

A large part of the problem is the scale differences.  The Maxis Highway lanes are less than 9 feet wide, averaging 8.75 feet.  Most road standards at least in the US mandate a 10-foot minimum just for local side streets--the design speed on a Maxis Highway in RL would probably be about 15-20mph (25-30km/h for ye metric folks).  The RHW lanes, even narrowed down a bit in V5, are around 14 feet, within established parameters for highways/freeways/motorways (most standards specifying 12-15-foot lanes).  In other words, the Maxis Highway lanes are about five-eighths (62.5%) of the width of an RHW lane. 

Using that 8.75ft. figure, 3 lanes of Maxis Highway = 26.25 feet.  2 lanes of RHW = 28 feet, and 3 lanes of RHW = 42 feet.
As a result, it's never going to be a very smooth transition between the two. 

-Alex

There you go.

[DAB_City]

Will there be a Maxis Highway/RHW-6 transition?

No.

Is that another one of those "unsolvable" problems?
The Maxis Highway/RHW-4 transition isn't realistic, and it creates a bottleneck. I was really hoping for a fix in the next RHW.

Is that another one of those "unsolvable" problems?

The problem is that the models for MHWs are far too complex to work with, which is also why there's very few new pieces for MHW.

It's doable, but the process of making such pieces is time-consuming.

A large part of the problem is the scale differences.  The Maxis Highway lanes are less than 9 feet wide, averaging 8.75 feet.  Most road standards at least in the US mandate a 10-foot minimum just for local side streets--the design speed on a Maxis Highway in RL would probably be about 15-20mph (25-30km/h for ye metric folks).  The RHW lanes, even narrowed down a bit in V5, are around 14 feet, within established parameters for highways/freeways/motorways (most standards specifying 12-15-foot lanes).  In other words, the Maxis Highway lanes are about five-eighths (62.5%) of the width of an RHW lane. 

Using that 8.75ft. figure, 3 lanes of Maxis Highway = 26.25 feet.  2 lanes of RHW = 28 feet, and 3 lanes of RHW = 42 feet.
As a result, it's never going to be a very smooth transition between the two. 

-Alex

There you go.

So you're either a Maxis Highway user or a RHW user? That's bad for mixed users like yours truly... I'll have to think of something else then, unless somebody has the guts to attempt this. Good luck to anyone who takes up the challenge 
P.S. Would RHW-6<>OWR-3<>Maxis Highway be possible, or would that end up with the same sort of problem? 

[Dexter]

@DAB_City:
There was a mod being developed to reduce the maxis highway to 4 lanes to bring it in line with the scaling of the other networks, but I believe it was abandoned due the the amount of repathing required.

IMO I would think a RHW6s into a maxis highway would look a bit stupid.


BTW Is there any plans in the future of making it possible to drag another network under the onslope pieces?  At the moment nothing can be dragged under the starter stubs.

[DAB_City]

@DAB_City:
There was a mod being developed to reduce the maxis highway to 4 lanes to bring it in line with the scaling of the other networks, but I believe it was abandoned due the the amount of repathing required.

IMO I would think a RHW6s into a maxis highway would look a bit stupid.


BTW Is there any plans in the future of making it possible to drag another network under the onslope pieces?  At the moment nothing can be dragged under the starter stubs.

Yeah, I guess the transition wouldn't be the greatest... I just hope that with RHW 5.0, the system will become even more flexible. I tend to use Maxis highways within urban areas, and switch to RHW for where I have more space (suburbs, countryside etc.).

But anyway, thank you to all the RHW team for an excellent job so far, and we look forward to RHW 5.0! 

[MandelSoft]

I used to do that. Now I just create more space, or just create smaller, non-freeflowing interchange.

[GDO29Anagram]

Several things to point out:

- Even an MHW to dual OWR-3 transition would have the same smooth-transitioning problem as an MHW to 6S transition. Besides, it's rather odd (and oftentimes visually unappealing) to go from network A to network B to network C, just to transition from A to C.

- It is possible to drag networks under an RHW starter stub, such as in an On-Slope piece. However, it's limited to RHW-based networks. Doing this for non-RHW networks would either require removing the starter and then relocating the starter or making RHW overpass pieces.

- The Urban Highway Project (UHW) was an old project that made the MHW more RHW-like. Trivia: Maxis originally wanted MHWs to have four lanes, but were forced to cram two more lanes to give a "big-city" feel; That means UHW was a resurrection of what Maxis had in mind.

[jondor]

BTW Is there any plans in the future of making it possible to drag another network under the onslope pieces?  At the moment nothing can be dragged under the starter stubs.

The two things you have to understand about the starter stubs is that: one, they are already intersections and two, in the case of the onslope pieces, they are absolutely necessary to make the piece behave the way we expect it to.

The starter stubs can accept orthogonal RHW drags underneath because one of the two networks involved in the false intersection is already RHW and because their RUL1 and RUL2 code was specially created to allow it.  In theory, certain starter stubs might be able modded to accept crossings by (and only by) the other network involved, but it would be extremely limited, messy and could have nasty side effects on non starter intersections.

In order to allow different networks under what is now the starter stub, a separate piece would be required for each and every network (including separate pieces for override networks). 

[sepen77]

Questions:

Will there be more ramp type options for the wider RHW. Like a type C for 6s and 8s. Currently there is only type C for 6c and 8c... why?

Also, about the FARHW... should there be larger angle curves for wider RHW? For Example: FARHW-6s -> Diagonal RHW-6s or even FARHW-6s -> Orthogonal RHW-6s (the larger angled one)

[Tarkus]

Will there be more ramp type options for the wider RHW. Like a type C for 6s and 8s. Currently there is only type C for 6c and 8c... why?

As far as "why", it's simply a function of time.  If we tried to answer every single reasonable "is this possible?" question to the affirmative (let alone the unreasonable ones), we'd never be able to release because we'd be in perpetual development--that's part of the reason there's so much time between releases as it is.  That said, there will be Type C and D ramps for the RHW-6S and RHW-8S in Version 5.0.

Also, about the FARHW... should there be larger angle curves for wider RHW? For Example: FARHW-6s -> Diagonal RHW-6s or even FARHW-6s -> Orthogonal RHW-6s (the larger angled one)

The diagonal RHW-6S functionality was just overhauled and reconfigured for Version 5.0 (going from a puzzle-piece-based dual shared-tile setup, to a draggable overhanging-single-tile setup), so I wouldn't anticipate anything on that front until Version 5.1 at the earliest.  There will, however, be a FARHW-6C-to-Diagonal RHW-6C piece in Version 5.0. 

A FARHW-6S -> Orthogonal RHW-6S "Long Curve" (71.6-degree) would have to be an absolutely massive piece--it's almost a 90-degree curve, which doesn't exist for anything but the MIS and RHW-2 as the radius would need to be extremely wide to be realistic for anything larger than that.

Taking up another subject that has recently been broached, the situation with the Maxis Highways and how they relate to the RealHighway system is one that I've thought a lot about over the years.  I'll try to explain some of my analysis and thinking on this front, as its a rather popular (and controversial) topic that comes up any time anyone asks about adding MHW functionality to the RHW.

On one side, there are folks like myself--I haven't built a new Maxis Highway (aside from ones built for testing purposes) in a city since I began developing RHW content almost 5 years ago.  On the other hand, there's "diehard Maxis Highway users", who avoid the RHW altogether.  Most of these folks are either (a) novices who find the RHW's learning curve and/or footprint to be too much for them, (b) they're "non-highway" folks, who wish to focus on other aspects of the game that are more to their interest, or (c) they're "vanillists" and use no plugins, or a very minimal set of plugins at most.

Then there's the folks who use both systems.  These folks typically still use the Maxis Highways for a few reasons--(a) there are certain functional aspects that the Maxis system has that the RHW does not yet have, or where the Maxis system performs better, (b) perception that the Maxis Highways are somehow "more urban", in which case MHWs feature in the denser areas of their cities/regions, (c) out of habit, or because they have pre-existing MHW systems, or (d) simply because it's there.

The "diehards" on both sides are easy to figure out.  The folks splitting the difference are more of a conundrum.  While putting more MHW/RHW interface functionality in place would satisfy these folks in the short run, it's difficult (and time-consuming) to produce aesthetically-satisfying results given the massive scale differential (especially on transitions). And each RHW release has made massive strides in adding functionality that allows for more flexibility and ease of use, which generally leads to a downward trend in Maxis Highway usage, and a substantial decline in requests for extremely development-intensive Maxis Highway content (e.g. interchanges).  If we expand Maxis Highway/RHW functionality, it'll create more demand for Maxis Highway content.  It's very much a slippery slope.

That's why there's been a lot of developmental investment on things like FLEXFly, Draggable Ramp Interfaces, FlexSPUI and the NWM's upcoming Draggable Transition functionality, which I'm hoping to port over to the RHW after Version 5.0 (there's been some implementation issues to sort out, caused by the base RHW network's "auto-connect" tendencies). Our goal is to make the mod more expansive yet simpler to use at the same time with each new release--a seemingly paradoxical goal that will make more sense as we go forward. 

-Alex

[jdenm8]

Will there be more ramp type options for the wider RHW. Like a type C for 6s and 8s. Currently there is only type C for 6c and 8c... why?

For ramps for the C networks, there will be a few more in this release, but they'll be constrained to FARHW (I think).
I there was a Type E ramp (A equiv), a Type F Ramp (B equiv) and an RHW-8C Splitter (\ FARHW-4 \| RHW-6C |) in the latest build, but that's about it that's new and there won't be any more additions.

[banditp61]

I was wondering will there be more development on the FlexFly?
I.e.- 4ELRHW FlexFly; Curved Sloped MIS or 4ELRHW FlexFly; possibly even just straight pieces.

I don't know much about the FlexFly's and their limitations, so I'm just spitball-ing ideas.

[TEG24601]

As I am finally using a large amount of RHW on my new "New Seattle" region, I am finding that not having elevated roads over RHW8c or 10c (same for tunnels) is hampering some of my plans.

TEG