RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

CahosRahneVeloza · March 30, 2014, 09:51:37 AM

@APSMS: Well, the first issue I've come across is which transition piece should I use, the FLEX On ramp that can be over ridden or the 6S on/Off ramp from the other menu button?

But the main issue lies with the fact that I can't seem to make the 6S ERHW as seen on this screenshot:

MandelSoft · March 30, 2014, 10:03:26 AM

That's because you drag all the way through. The trick is to half-drag this; first, you drag the straight end to one end of the diagonal (making a T-intersection). Then do the same at the other end (BUT DO NOT DRAG THROUGH THE INTERSECTION). This is VITAL for this method to work!

CahosRahneVeloza · March 30, 2014, 10:41:17 AM

Quote from: MandelSoft on March 30, 2014, 10:03:26 AM
That's because you drag all the way through. The trick is to half-drag this; first, you drag the straight end to one end of the diagonal (making a T-intersection). Then do the same at the other end (BUT DO NOT DRAG THROUGH THE INTERSECTION). This is VITAL for this method to work!

I think my head just exploded

Which was why I was asking for a tutorial. A tutorial with pictures or even a video tutorial would most probably make those instructions extremely clearer.

Geometry123 · March 31, 2014, 10:34:04 PM

Here 'ya go kababayan!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8AntwDobQY

CahosRahneVeloza · April 01, 2014, 08:45:01 AM

Thanks Geometry123, I get it now

I'll post a screenshot of my completed 10S T interchange when I finally finish it

RFE: Addendum:

Took awhile but finally here it is:

esto · April 09, 2014, 04:47:05 PM

Getting this with the latest version of NAM - normal?

APSMS · April 09, 2014, 05:19:13 PM

Unfortunately it is normal behavior. The models have yet to be updated to spec, and as it's only a cosmetic issue, priority is fairly low.

It'll probably be fixed as an unmentioned extra in a future release no doubt. The NAM Team does care about aesthetics, just not as much as functionality.

GDO29Anagram · April 09, 2014, 05:34:08 PM

Quote from: esto on April 09, 2014, 04:47:05 PM
Getting this with the latest version of NAM - normal?

I'm pretty doubtful that it'll ever be fixed; that's now considered an outdated piece. The Flex equivalent has long since replaced it but the old pieces are still available.

esto · April 10, 2014, 08:08:42 AM

Quote from: GDO29Anagram on April 09, 2014, 05:34:08 PM
Quote from: esto on April 09, 2014, 04:47:05 PM
Getting this with the latest version of NAM - normal?

I'm pretty doubtful that it'll ever be fixed; that's now considered an outdated piece. The Flex equivalent has long since replaced it but the old pieces are still available.

I didn't notice those! Thanks

M4346 · April 27, 2014, 02:56:02 PM

Please forgive me if this has been asked and addressed before, but I can't seem to find it.

I'm having a problem with the RHW crossing a railway. Trains can't cross the RHW at the intersection.

Is this "normal"? If I replace the RHW / Rail crossing with a road / rail crossing it works fine.

auandi@gmail.com · April 27, 2014, 07:54:27 PM

I don't know if this is where to ask, but I was wondering if there was any consideration to including a L0->L3 or L0->L4 on slope transition? I like having bridges very tall and if I could transition from the bridge to a high elevation highway then I wouldn't need this massive cliff leading all the way up to the bridge. Particularly interested in RHW-4 and RHW-6s since that's what the bridges tend to be, but I also don't know nearly enough to know if that would even be possible.

eggman121 · April 27, 2014, 08:39:21 PM

Quote from: auandi@gmail.com on April 27, 2014, 07:54:27 PM
I don't know if this is where to ask, but I was wondering if there was any consideration to including a L0->L3 or L0->L4 on slope transition? I like having bridges very tall and if I could transition from the bridge to a high elevation highway then I wouldn't need this massive cliff leading all the way up to the bridge. Particularly interested in RHW-4 and RHW-6s since that's what the bridges tend to be, but I also don't know nearly enough to know if that would even be possible.

Hello auandi

Here is a tutorial I wrote a while ago about making a L0 to L3 transition, it can be found a Here: http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=14090.msg472764#msg472764

Hope this helps

-eggman121

M4346 · April 29, 2014, 01:12:03 AM

Quote from: M4346 on April 27, 2014, 02:56:02 PM
Please forgive me if this has been asked and addressed before, but I can't seem to find it.

I'm having a problem with the RHW crossing a railway. Trains can't cross the RHW at the intersection.

Is this "normal"? If I replace the RHW / Rail crossing with a road / rail crossing it works fine.

Upon closer investigation, this is what I found:

Is this normal?

APSMS · April 29, 2014, 02:33:24 AM

Definitely not. I notice that you are running LHD (which I think should be RHD, but for conventions sake...), and because the LHD paths are bugged by default in the base game, that might be the issue.

Something this serious should've been fixed by now. I wonder if the rarity of such crossings is what has allowed it to perpetuate. Alternatively it may be a corrupted file, but that would be strange. You have NAM 32 I imagine, so barring complete oversight it may simply be that the intersection is unsupported. Can't imagine why, though.

M4346 · April 29, 2014, 01:18:33 PM

I am indeed using LHD, because that's what we use in South Africa and left is right, after all

LOL

Now, I'd fix this myself, but I don't know which programme to use, let alone how to draw paths :-/

memo · April 29, 2014, 02:07:19 PM

Oh dear, I just had a look at the LHD paths and remember why there are some issues. When NAM 31 was supposed to be released on March 1st, 2013, we had quite a tight schedule... There were no LHD paths for the entire RHW mod until just before the release, so I created them in a hurry... while not having slept the night before. Apparently, there are still some bugged ones left, but I got the majority right I hope. Just for fun, I've just looked up the exact date of completion: March 01, 2013, 23:57:28, CET.

You could try the simple fix I have attached, but bear in mind that other RHW intersections might still be broken. Although SC4Paths are rather simple objects, there are just enormously many of them which makes it hard to cope with all of them, and we still don't have the right tool to deal with them efficiently.

M4346 · April 30, 2014, 01:27:36 AM

Thank you!

compdude787 · May 10, 2014, 11:13:41 PM

I am working on an interchange and wanted to have a FlexFly going over an RHW-6S. When I place the FlexFly and drag the RHW-6s underneath, this is what happens:

See how that tile of RHW is facing the wrong direction? Even if I had the RHW-6 there first and then plopped the FlexFly, it would still switch direction. Clicking all over the place did not help, neither did placing starter pieces on either side of the FlexFly in an attempt to force it to go the right direction.

But I eventually figured out that if I dragged a stub of RHW out from the offending tile of RHW-6, then it would switch to the right direction. Problem solved (sort of):

It would be nice not to have that stub there, but I'll take it over a wrong-way RHW. Either way, could you guys please look into this and try to fix this bug? Thanks!

Tarkus · May 11, 2014, 01:10:58 AM

The existing FLEXFly system has a number of quirks like that, as it is essentially a legacy item that, due to its complexity, has developed a few issues during our code refactoring. You might actually be able to place the starter under the FLEXFly, and I'd give that a shot.

The existing FLEXFly is not planned to be fixed, mainly as there have been plans to re-implement the FLEXFly system with a different footprint, and at different height levels. It's been on the drawing board since after NAM 30, but due to the sheer amount of code that's required, it's been delayed indefinitely, placing the entire FLEXFly system into a long awkward limbo.

-Alex

compdude787 · May 11, 2014, 01:10:52 PM

The FlexFly piece does seem to have many quirks to it, but it is nice because otherwise "Autoconnect" (which can be just as stupid as autocorrect on smartphones) would completely screw up a diagonal overpass over RHW. That and the very non-descriptive "unsuitable area to build network" message, well, they really test your patience in building RHW interchanges. I was building that flexfly as part of a clover-turbine interchange in a suburban area, and that is my first really complex interchange between two freeways. I really applaud those of you who have the expertise and patience to build one of those complex interchanges in one sitting. Boy, I really didn't know what I was getting myself into... I couldn't spend more than an hour on that sucker before I get so frustrated with autoconnect and other annoyances that I have to be done for the night. I'll post some pics on the "show us your interchanges" thread once I finish it.

Anyway, I'll try and put the starter underneath the FlexFly and see if it behaves nicely. It would be nice in the future to have a L1 flexfly along with a level-2 flexfly so you could have the two cross over each other when you're making a T-interchange. But I'll wait patiently for that; I'm sure there's many elements of the RHW and NAM that you want to re-do.