NAM Issues Thread - PLEASE POST YOUR NAM QUESTIONS AND PROBLEMS HERE

[Tarkus]

It's possible that the network choices used for Tram-on-Road draggables (Rail overplop on Road) might have some unintended effects with the El-Rail pathing.  The Rail overplop is the reason you're not seeing the data view highlight at ground level, rather than 15m elevated.  Is the Tram-in-Road draggable (El-Rail overplop on Road) working properly?

If my suspicions are correct from this report, it's probably going to require a complete retooling of Tram-on-Road draggables.

-Alex

[APSMS]

As far as I can tell, the Tram in Road draggables work fine with the exception that I think some intersections were missing some paths (I'll have to double check though).

Most of the TIR in my city is dragged (grass stretches and some intersections excepted), and seems to work without issue, so I suspect everything is OK there.

I wonder what it is about the Rail network that seems to make it unsuitable for overriding to other network types. A similar problem was had with the initial implementation of the DDRHW-4, right? Or was that just a capacity reversion to default road values from the intended Heavy Rail ones (which are usually much higher)?

On a slightly unrelated note, I discovered that it is possible to create "draggable" stretches of El-Rail-over-Road by dragging the El-Rail diagonally across the road, and deleting the rail one tile distant from the road; the result was two tiles worth of ELRoR, which was very much unexpected.

[titanicbuff]

whats odd is I've always had trouble with trams- although during my alpha testing I did test the draggables and it seemed to work fine. Its the plops I have an issue with.

[Tyberius06]

Hello!

I ran into an issue with RHW-2 under FlexFly. It doesn't work at all. I can draw the RHW-2 under the FlexFly but it breaks where it reaches the edge of the FlexFly.  Is that a bug or doesn't have any support for this? The other types (RHW-4, MIS) work fine.




Another issues with the traffic were noticed a few months ago. I draw a street under the RHW and covered the street with TE'd overhanging Lots. After that the cars 'jumped' from the street directly to the RHW. I'm not sure if this is an issue with street under RHW or the overhanging Lots, but the overhanging parts were under the RHW (obviously). See the pictures.





Thanks for any help.

- Tyberius

[APSMS]

Tyberius06, the deck jumping is due to the TE lots. When traffic exits a TE lot, it doesn't have a specified height (all networks in the game are actually flat) and therefore traffic on the street sees the RHW as a perfectly viable route.

To mitigate the problem, you'll have to make sure the closest TE lot is at least one tile away.

[mgb204]

To mitigate the problem, you'll have to make sure the closest TE lot is at least one tile away.

Do you know which TE lots are used here? If they don't require proper TE-Access, modifying them to remove the transit switches will prevent the problem entirely.

[Tyberius06]

Do you know which TE lots are used here? If they don't require proper TE-Access, modifying them to remove the transit switches will prevent the problem entirely.

I reloted paeng's SST Alley extenders, put some hedges on the sides, removed the fences and changed the TE road access to street access.

Since than I closed this street (city development) so it doesn't go through under the RHW any more, but I maybe want to use these lots in the future.

My other question is rather bothering me about the RHW-2 under FlexFly, because it's holding me back a major intersection project.

[eggman121]

My other question is rather bothering me about the RHW-2 under FlexFly, because it's holding me back a major intersection project.

There is no functionality in that space and there will probably never by the way it was designed. I would make two Minicurves and pass the RHW 2 under the diagonal section.

-eggman121

[mgb204]

Since than I closed this street (city development) so it doesn't go through under the RHW any more, but I maybe want to use these lots in the future.

Well, if you want to run a street under RHW, don't add these lots on top. Otherwise, use the overhanding sidewalk props with a new lot, one that has no TE enabling. Part of how Maxis made the game, you can see the same issue with all TE lots, so you'll have to compromise here.

[APSMS]

My other question is rather bothering me about the RHW-2 under FlexFly, because it's holding me back a major intersection project.

There is no functionality in that space and there will probably never by the way it was designed. I would make two Minicurves and pass the RHW 2 under the diagonal section.

-eggman121

Given that Bus Rapid transit pieces are RHW-2, I wonder why it was designed this way. Will ERHW-2 pass over the FLEXFly, or are all RHW-2 interactions with the network unsupported?

[Tarkus]

It was designed that way because it was determined that adding L0 RHW-2 support substantially destabilized all other network crossings.  As all other RHW networks are overrides of the L0 RHW-2, if the L0 RHW-2 support were added, there'd have to be a ton of extra adjacency support for the other networks to override L0 RHW-2-under-FLEXFly.  Given that flyover ramps are much more commonly seen on larger freeways, rather than two-lane ones, and the goal of the feature was to better support complex stack interchanges, this was deemed an acceptable compromise.

-Alex

[Tyberius06]

There is no functionality in that space and there will probably never by the way it was designed. I would make two Minicurves and pass the RHW 2 under the diagonal section.

-eggman121

I don't really understand this 'there is no functionality' part. There is a RHW 6C ramp where 2 RHW 4 on the sides and a RHW 2 in the middle of the ramp is becoming to RHW 6C. I'd use this ramp and I should make a lot of overpasses and/or FlexFlys which would go above the RHW 2. As the RHW 2 is the base of the whole network, I don't understand why doesn't it work with FlexFlys if the rest of the network do.

[APSMS]

It was designed that way because it was determined that adding L0 RHW-2 support substantially destabilized all other network crossings.

-Alex

Hmm. Fair enough. Does this mean ERHW-2 is supported, or...?

You know what, I should just test this out in-game. I can see the problems involved, though, now that you've explained it.

[Tarkus]

I don't really understand this 'there is no functionality' part. There is a RHW 6C ramp where 2 RHW 4 on the sides and a RHW 2 in the middle of the ramp is becoming to RHW 6C. I'd use this ramp and I should make a lot of overpasses and/or FlexFlys which would go above the RHW 2. As the RHW 2 is the base of the whole network, I don't understand why doesn't it work with FlexFlys if the rest of the network do.

To reiterate, the fact that the L0 RHW-2 is the base network of everything is the precisely the reason it isn't supported.  It's different from past standards to do things this way, but it has always been possible to support the override networks without base network support, and doing so in this case actually makes a substantial improvement on the stability of the other override networks.  We'll most likely do this when FlexSPUI is re-implemented.

Without the L0 RHW-2 support, things can be coded directly as, say, an L1 RHW-6S crossing under an L2 FLEXFly, whereas if we have the L0 RHW-2 support, the FLEXFly crossing will have a tendency to "deconvert" to the L0 RHW-2-under-L2 FLEXFly crossing.  We would have to add additional adjacency stability to cover the L1 RHW-6S going into L0 RHW-2-under-L2 FLEXFly situation.  It gets even more complicated with the wider networks or adjacent networks, because the side overrides would then have a tendency to deconvert to L0 RHW-2.

If we were to add L0 RHW-2 support, it would actually require adding a few hundred thousand lines of RUL2 code to handle all the new adjacencies cases, and even then, things might not be as stable with the other networks as it is presently.

-Alex

[Tyberius06]

Ops, well I see. Thank you for your explanation, Alex. 

[Themistokles]

@Themistokles:
These textures probably don't have EU variants then.

As it happens, I've already re-worked them for EU & LHD usage as an update for NAM 35. LHD support never existed for these pieces. I have to check my files, but one way or another I can provide a patch with RHD EU textures for you. All these updates might be a bit late though. Since I'm sure it won't be too long before they are replaced with flexible alternatives.

If you'd be willing to provide such a patch, I'd be really grateful!

[mgb204]

If you'd be willing to provide such a patch, I'd be really grateful!

Attached. Untested, although aside from being in EU guise (thanks Tarkus for the script ), they are a carbon copy of the US textures.

Update2:

Attachment removed, fixes will be included in NAM35.

[Alan_Waters]

Please tell me this is just my sims do not wish to walk and ride under the RHW L2, except on the subway?

[compdude787]

It would help if you posted a picture with the paths showing. To get the paths to show up, press Ctrl-X to open up the cheat console, type in DrawPaths and, if you have the Extra Cheats Plugin installed, the paths should show up on the roadways. (To turn them off, use the HidePaths cheat) That way, we can see if things are working the way they should.

[Alan_Waters]

It will probably be clearer:






This occurs only on the diagonal RHW.