SC4 Devotion Forum Archives

SC4D Collaborative Region Projects => Three Rivers Region => 3RR Collaboration Showcase => Topic started by: dedgren on April 05, 2007, 07:53:17 AM

Title: General Discussion
Post by: dedgren on April 05, 2007, 07:53:17 AM
OK, this is the first post in a thread I'm calling "General Discussion."  Here, the 3RR Collaboration Team Members can discuss topics of general significance to the 3RR collaboration effort in a forum that is also open to public input.  'Couple of points-

1.  If there's a limited interest matter a team member needs to surface or have addressed, or if there's a problem of some sort, let's have those discussion over on the team's private thread.  If we decide as a group that public input is warranted, or would in some way be helpful, we can then bring it over here.

2.  If you're not on the 3RR Collaboration Team, but are interested in the collaboration effort and in how 3RR turns out at the end of the day, feel free to post here and throw in your 2 cents (or 2 dollars for that matter- if you are thinking about a larger contribution, LOL, PM me and I'll send you details on my PayPal account).  Everything posted here will be considered, so don't hold back just because you haven't stepped forward (yet) and joined the team.

3.  Along that line, post requests to develop a quad (i.e.: to become a new team member) here.  Sometimes I miss stuff posted in 3RR when it gets busy.

4.  Announcements concerning the collaboration effort will be posted here- I will also try to make sure, depending on the significance, that they go out over the PM system as well.

* * *

So, with that, I'll exit here and double-post with the first topic for discussion.


David
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: dedgren on April 05, 2007, 08:37:18 AM
Topic for Discussion No. 1-

The premise behind 3RR development generally is that it is occurring in a region in the North American midwest/north woods that was settled commencing in the 1830s, grew into its present land use and development patterns mainly in the late 1800s/early 20th Century, and has preserved a fairly great amount of that development to the present day.  This is not to say that in places like Pineshore that there is not modern urban development- my thought is that the downtown should have a fair number of new buildings mixed in with the old.  There are also modern suburbs that date back only to the 1950s and 60s (Haypoint, Baudette and to some degree Richwood and Harford).  The smaller city and town cores, though, should be reflective of the sort of substantial and prosperous Main Street commercial and civic development that was in place by the 1950s.

Another guiding principle behind developing the region is that, while each team member should have as much opportunity as possible to put his or her individual stamp on the quad in question, all development should tend toward a reasonably consistent whole.  I'm again focused here mainly on urban development.  I think this means a couple of things.

1.  We need to have some degree of agreement on basic considerations of big city architecture- no buildings, for example, over X stories tall (I don't think, for example, that there is a building in Duluth or Winnipeg that is over 15 stories tall).  My sense of larger midwestern cities with substantial roots in the 1800s is that large numbers of older building are made out of brick, as another example.

2.  For smaller cities and town, we need to identify an across-the-board set of plugins that will give us a consistent built environment appearance.  Once we do this, I will then ask each individual team member developing a small city or town to propose a reasonable number of additional plugins that he or she thinks is necessary in "personalizing" the development.

3.  Villages and places, in that they are mainly residential, will need a basic set of across-the-board residential structures.  In the midwestern towns where I grew up, two story brick, stucco and balloon-frame wood sided houses were the norm.  Lots tended to be 50'x150'/16m x 48m in older urban single-family residential areas laid out in rectangular grid "blocks."  Post-mid 20th Century subdivision development employed larger lots on streets that tended to meander around, and there were often small cul-de-sacs to maximize the use of space.

So, what basic commercial and residential plugins should we use for Pineshore (I'll broach industrial stuff later in connection with that portion of the backstory)?  What basic commercial and residential plugins would be a good choice for our smaller localities?  Should we exclude Maxis stuff?

A couple of points to keep in mind.

1.  I plan to use a population reducer mod (I know there is one- I can't remember what it is called) to keep pops realistic and in line with the targets we've set in the backstory.  Those targets, mind you, are not hard-and-fast, and we can increase or decrease them for good reason.

2.  I grew up with midwestern brands of gasoline all around me.  Many companies are long gone, but whatever the status quo is today, we need to agree on four or five brands of gas that will be sold in the region consistent with the plugins that are available.  I recall Standard (later American then Amoco), Cities Service (later Citgo), Shell, Texaco, Phillips 66, Sinclair (later Arco), and Mobil.  In Canada, I recall Shell (again) and Esso.  I'm open to using any reasonably realistic brand out there (sorry, no Chevron (west coast), Union 76 (ditto), Sohio (where do you think?), or Conoco (U.S. south).

That's plenty to start with.  We'll see how the ball rolls, and then I intend to next visit the issue of mods to be used generally.  I have a little list...

Later.


David
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: pvarcoe on April 05, 2007, 08:42:31 AM
Hi David.

I will follow these threads with much interest.
I haven't signed up, but am very interested to see what standards come into use in 3RR.
By standards I'm thinking of things like what road mods (dirt shoulders, etc) will be used.
Also things like terrain mods, water, all of that kind of thing.
Also standards like your proposed mile roads and quarter sections.

I must confess, those types of things really catch my attention, and also influence my development in TT.

The collaborative effort with 3RR is a massive project. I will be very interesting to watch it unfold.
All the best with it!

Phil


HEY, just read your second post while this was uploading. Scary minds, er I mean great minds think....
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Unkles27 on April 05, 2007, 09:06:47 AM
well, this is going to be very complicated... but we can do it.
As far as bats and stuff go, JBSimio's smalltownUSA buildings will be a must, maybe a few different houses and a few strip mall type commercial buildings.
Will it matter what version of the NAM that we will use? Cause I haven't upgraded mine and I'm not sure if I want to.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Shadow Assassin on April 05, 2007, 09:12:14 AM
Now, this is a good idea. You were asking about the population halver: here's the link (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=12383). Use at your own risk, though. :P
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Travis on April 05, 2007, 10:46:30 AM
Whew, I can't keep up with you! You type faster than I can read...
This certainly isn't a normal MD anymore. (Not like it ever was...)
It's also a good idea to use the same style of architecture across the region when it comes to plugins. Helps to keep things consistent.
But I have one important question: will you use the Rural Highway mod in 3RR? It seems to be a perfect fit for the way you
describe the region's highways, but I believe it is not compatible with the latest version of the NAM. Thus, I haven't installed the
new NAM yet, and I probably won't until the new version of the Rural Highway mod is released, which will make it compatible.
Well, what should I do?  &Thk/(

Later.

Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: pvarcoe on April 05, 2007, 11:17:06 AM
Hi Travis.

I am currently using the 2 lane rural highway mod, with the new NAM, and it seems to be working ok.
But I am using it purely in that 2 lane capacity as a rural highway (uhhhh, hmmmm).
Works pretty well in a rural based senario.


Phil

Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Tarkus on April 05, 2007, 12:03:46 PM
I'd concur about using JBSimio's stuff.  There's some Maxis stuff that looks okay, but then there's some that doesn't, so I'm split on the Maxis-blocking issue.  As far as more recent residential stuff for suburbia, I'd say some of SimGoober's RLS Suburban Homes would do the trick.  I believe DuskTrooper has something along those lines as well.

And Travis, as part of the RHW team, I can tell you that the new v17 version of the mod that is compatible with NAM v20 (the most recent version) has had significant delays.  The other member of the team, qurlix, had been doing all the work on v17, seems to have disappeared. 

I know he had some RL, and I haven't heard from him in over a month.  Last I heard, he was pretty close, but not ready to release it.  However, I have found what the issues are with the NAM/RHW incompatibility and successfully created a fix for it.  I've asked qurlix if I can release this fix (v13) in the interim, and I'm waiting to hear back.  So if David wants to include the RHW as part of the plug-in set for 3RR, someone on the RHW may be able to accommodate it. ;)

-Alex
(3RR-RHW Liaison, I guess)
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 05, 2007, 04:03:45 PM
David,

As promised, here is my official request to participate in the collaboration: Quads 1, 3, 4 are fine with me, if they're not already taken. I look forward to getting started!

Dustin
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: threestooges on April 05, 2007, 04:52:49 PM
Just a quick point of clarification regarding principle 3 (referring to lot size) 16m x 48m translates to 1x3 tiles in game. I would assume smaller (1x2) would also work. If there are any problems along those lines, please let me know.

For places such as Tincup (and other such old/abandoned towns) onlyplace4 has some good western type stuff, I'm just not sure how well it would fit into the location. I know Colorado and places farther west have the typical western structures but as far as I know that also extends eastward (but please ocrrect me if I'm wrong).

Lastly, I was wondering when those who will be collaborating will find out what quad(s) they will be developing, as well as any backstory already in place for them, so that they may begin to better plan for it.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: BigSlark on April 05, 2007, 05:26:22 PM
JBSimio's work has to be included for a midwestern-style region. It seems that the only close terrain mod is c.p.'s Columbus, if there's something more suitable I'd be very happy.

I have managed to completely remove Maxis created Residential buildings from the game and, as a general rule, it looks MUCH better. Granted, I have a very strange collection of residential structures without any regard to their origin, but some such as the Suburban Homes and American Four Square would be perfect for 3RR.

And count this as another vote for RHW.

As for Historic Towns, many towns on the frontier (which 3RR would have been in the 1830's) burned SEVERAL times before they got fire departments. I have family in the tiny Western Kansas town of Collyer, which was founded in 1861 and managed to burn in 1866, 1888, 1899, and 1923 before they got a fire engine. As a result, the entire commercial district dates from at the earliest 1900. And, if my memory serves me correctly, the neighboring town of WaKeeney lost an entire block to fire at the late date of 1936!

Since we're also creating historic towns, I wish there was a way to make jeronji's streetside mod applicable in some situations but not others. It would look great in an old downtown but wouldn't look quite right in a new suburban neighborhood.

Just some things to think about.
Cheers,
Kevin
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: dedgren on April 05, 2007, 05:57:14 PM
A couple of things- Phil (pvarcoe), who lives close to there, gently corrected my wrong impression that Winnipeg, at least, has no buildings over 15 stories.  I checked and, believe it or not, there is a whole thread on Wikipedia [linkie] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Winnipeg's_10_tallest_buildings) devoted to nothing other than the tallest buildings in Winnipeg.  There, I quickly learned that the tallest building is 33 stories tall...

...and there's a shorter one at 34 stories- go figure!

So I was not even half right as far as Winnipeg goes.  Thought I'd check out Duluth, just to be a completist.  I didn't get very far, at least on the web.  Searching turned up no reference to any tall building of any height in Duluth (which sounds like a very nice place to live, by the way, if you don't mind big weather- there were no pics of the city in a sleet storm with 50mph/80 kph winds).  Wikipedia does have a website listing the tallest buildings in Minnesota [linkie] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Minnesota).  No building in Duluth makes the list, which goes down to about 300 feet/30.5 meters.

So, no building in Pineshore over 30-40 stories?  I'll look for your thoughts.

* * *

Tincup has always been one of my favorite mountain town names.  There is a real one- it's a ghost town just west of the Collegiate Peaks of the Colorado Rockies.

(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg243.imageshack.us%2Fimg243%2F9605%2Ftincuppe0.jpg&hash=1926a5aeb205a28940ed8b8e89217934ea38c31e)

3RR's Tincup would be developed consistent with the backstory, so it wouldn't likely be old west false fronts, but it would be pretty rustic.

* * *

I see some good discussion to this point.  I'll let it run another day or so (actually, I won't have a choice- I'll be on a plane for about 13 hours tomorrow).  I'd actually like to have folks go so far as to even propose a candidate list.  I've got a loose one kicking around in my head already, but I'd like to listen to someone else other than the voice inside my head for a change.

* * *

The RHW- never thought of proceeding without it.  I was hoping the NAM conflict would have gotten sorted out, as I love the new "wide-radius" RR curves, even if the close-up appearance is less than perfect.  We'll work things out.

* * *

Dustin (thundercrack83) will be joining us.  I've set up his access to the private thread, and it looks like he's going for the gusto with a Pineshore quad.

I've got to pack...


David
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Zaphod on April 05, 2007, 08:29:59 PM
hey im here

As for pineshore, I think you should do a good sized downtown. the city may not be huge, but its the biggest city for many many miles and therefore I would imagine its a rather important place
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Tarkus on April 05, 2007, 09:12:59 PM
Hi David-

Thanks for the update on things, and it's interesting to know about the building heights.  I'm personally in favor of limiting the building size to about 20-30 stories for realism purposes.  The Wells Fargo Center, which is the tallest building in Portland, Oregon (the closest "big city" to me) is 41 floors, and it has a 2006 population to 562,690 (Metro Area around 2 million), whereas 3RR's entire regional population is 463,880. However, there is a lot of diversity in terms of building heights in cities.  Omaha, Nebraska, however, has a metro population of only 819,246, but has a 45-story building (though they quickly shrink after that). 

Hope you have a safe and smooth trip back to Alaska, and we definitely will be able to work something out with the RHW. ;)

-Alex



Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Unkles27 on April 05, 2007, 10:16:39 PM
I also think we should limit the building height in Pineshore. I always sort of imagine an Anchorage like downtown, not huge but still respectable and very pretty
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 05, 2007, 10:28:56 PM
Quote from: Zaphod on April 05, 2007, 08:29:59 PM
hey im here

As for pineshore, I think you should do a good sized downtown. the city may not be huge, but its the biggest city for many many miles and therefore I would imagine its a rather important place

I agree with you completely. If I remember correctly, David set the population for Pineshore between 150,000 - 200,000 (I can't remember the exact figure). Growing up in eastern Pennsylvania, a city of that size is about the same size as Allentown, PA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allentown%2C_PA). As far as the midwestern cities, Des Moines, IA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Des_Moines) has a population of around 194,000, which is in the ballpark. For me, it all depends upon how David envisions the area and then striving to work within his vision as best as possible.

Quote from: Unkles27 on April 05, 2007, 10:16:39 PM
I also think we should limit the building height in Pineshore. I always sort of imagine an Anchorage like downtown, not huge but still respectable and very pretty

As far as a building height limit, I agree with that, too. I wouldn't put the Sears Tower in downtown Pineshore, but since it is the main urban area of the region, I think some taller buildings would work well.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: threestooges on April 05, 2007, 11:30:59 PM
Also, in terms of a general list of things to include: a decent slope mod and the bridge height mod. I think that 30-40 floors wouldn't hurt as a height limit (at least for now).
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: meldolion on April 06, 2007, 12:58:32 AM
As a slope mode I'd use Jeronij's, to me seems to work pretty good... As for 30-40 floors limit here in Europe in a city like Pineshore is really rare to see buildings higher than 20 floors... Anyway, 30-40 floors seems good to me
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: barnatom on April 06, 2007, 01:05:43 AM
Yes, a height limit should be set. And it should be depending on the time the building was constructed. I haven't seen a midwest-city personaly, but I think that a 30 floor art-deco skysrcaper would be out of place in city with 200 000 inhabitants. So I suggest to establish a chart like this:

Chicago-style: No more than 6 floors
New-York-style: No more than 10 floors
and so on...


barnatom
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: tkirch on April 06, 2007, 07:19:47 AM
The small town stuff would fit in great with everything.

BSC would be great to, especially because of the tracking enabling on the agricultural stuff.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: BigSlark on April 06, 2007, 01:33:46 PM
Whenever I build a big city, the landmarks (central stations, parks, gov't buildings, et cetra) are plopped and the development is left to do its thing, barring three of the same building growing next to each other, so I don't have much to say on the Pineshore debate.

I do, however, carefully watch what grows in smaller cities and towns and bulldoze accordingly.

As for mods, C.P.'s Columbus Terrain and Trees, jeronji's slopes, NAM Jan. 2007, RHW vWorksWithNAM2007, and the city hall/opera house fixes seem to be the base requirements. What about one of the numerous transit map mods that give nifty results in region view?
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: threestooges on April 06, 2007, 03:13:30 PM
Although I'm not 100% sure on this, I recall hearing something that the city hall/opera house fix thingy adds extra benefits to the game, education etc (I'm not sure if that was what it was designed to do, I just recall hearing it had caused unexpected effects for some people). I have no problem using it, I'm just curious what all the effects are and what it's really necessary for.

-Edit- Following from the addition to 3RR's ongoing backstory, I think that the campgrounds from PEG would be quite a useful addition. They have a nice look to them (and are the only ones I can think of at this moment in time...which doesn't mean that more can't be created though). While I'm at it, would PEG's MTP thing be useful/wanted for this project?
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Travis on April 07, 2007, 03:17:20 PM
That sounds great! It's good to hear you can sort things out with the RHW . As for the building height in Pineshore, I've never been to the midwest,
but I'd say 30 stories is a good maximum height. Anyway, have a nice flight back to Alaska.  :thumbsup:

Later.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Heinz on April 08, 2007, 03:37:36 AM
yeah, 30 floors could be a good limit. it may hurt to those who want skyscrapers but if we want to stick to reality, it is a good limit. what is the RHW? and if i have nam2007, can i try it out? or will it be too complicated?

PEG MTP could be a good mod for 3rr. but we need to add more house designs and all.. at least for the different quads. the small town commercial lots, imo, would fit right in. jero's slope mod, too. and maybe try a definite set of crops to be grown, if we can do that.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Tarkus on April 08, 2007, 05:12:36 PM
Heinz, the RHW is the "Rural Highway" mod (a rather inaccurate name, as it's progressed toward being all-purpose).  It uses the ANT network from the NAM and makes it so that when you drag two ANTs adjacent to one another, they turn into a 4-lane highway, with 2 lanes per direction.  It is set up such that you can then separate the two sides of the 4-lane, such that you can have multi-tile medians as well.

Here (http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=124&threadid=67624&enterthread=y) is the only official development thread.  I'm hoping to have one here at SC4D here soon as well. There are a lot of new things that are being added to the RHW, including wider versions and a new Modular Interchange System (MIS) that I'm developing. It hasn't been released on any of the major SC exchanges, but you can get it here (http://koti.mbnet.fi/heka33/RHW-public-v012.zip). 

The current version, RHW v12, was made before NAM v20 (AKA NAM2007), and so while you can try it out with the new NAM, it will render the new features of NAM v20 (the underground Rail under Road pieces, etc.) essentially unusuable.  There will be some sort of fix released very soon, however.

-Alex
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Heinz on April 09, 2007, 05:13:03 AM
ok thank you for being so precise with your answer. will be following the RHW's development and fluid integration with NAM2007 so that i can have the best out of both. any updates, im sure, will be great for me and the community. thank you for your work! good luck
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: pickled_pig on April 09, 2007, 06:24:25 AM
Lots of good ideas here.  As for the building height issue, I think that thirty stories is a good height cap.  Potentially we could have something like Philidelphia, PA (though an East Coast city) used to have - where no building could be taller then the city's "signature" or unique building in the skyline, thus ensuring it would never be blocked by more homogenous cube-like buildings.

A lot of it, though, should depend on whether Pineshore experienced serious urban renewal and urban decay in the 1960s.  In the case of Charlotte, North Carolina (again, another eastern city, and thus not 100% representative of what we're doing), an uptown neighborhood of 10,000 was demolished in the '70s in the name of government plazas and parking lots.  Even more recently, an old warehouse in uptown that was the center of what little arts community Charlotte has was bought out with eminent domain and converted into a parking garage.  If we have a lot of that "urban renewal", then we'd have fewer older buildings and more opportunity for a more modern skyline.

-aaron
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 09, 2007, 10:13:53 AM
QuotePotentially we could have something like Philadelphia, PA (though an East Coast city) used to have - where no building could be taller then the city's "signature" or unique building in the skyline, thus ensuring it would never be blocked by more homogenous cube-like buildings.

Aaron: Unfortunately, that agreement was broken in 1987, when One Liberty Place (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Liberty_Place) was built in Philadelphia. And I have that to thank for the Phillies not winning the World Series in 1993...That and Mitch Williams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Williams#1993_World_Series)...

However, I like the spirit of that Philadelphia idea! We could pick a signature building as a landmark for Pineshore and use it the same way they did in Philadelphia, only stick to it and keep it the tallest building in the city. If we want the height limit to be 30 stories, pick a building that is roughly thirty stories, though I would pick something with a less round number like 32 or 34 stories, so it doesn't seem like it was "planned."

Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: barnatom on April 09, 2007, 01:42:14 PM
I don't know anything about Philadelphia, but this idea to pick one building as the tallest sounds like a good idea. Especially because sometimes the floornumber doesn't tell about the buildings height. By picking one building as the tallest we would have a good comparison or at least a maximum height in meters.
One question though: What was this signature building of Philadelphia and when was it build? Any photos?

Another question: C.p. did release some very nice early 19 century homes on the BSC-LEX, would they suit our midwestern area?

Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 09, 2007, 03:04:52 PM
barnatom: The building in Philadelphia is the Philadelphia City Hall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_City_Hall), with a statue of William Penn on the top. Here's a picture:

(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.istockphoto.com%2Ffile_thumbview_approve%2F624562%2F2%2Fistockphoto_624562_philadelphia_city_hall.jpg&hash=5d4a3d81ce814de356f8ef6441ea269c773b5035)
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: barnatom on April 09, 2007, 03:53:27 PM
Thank you for the picture and the link. I thought it would be something of this age. It would be nice to have a symbolic building like this in Pineshore. Repeating history could work as well, keeping it the highest until the 60s - and build higher ones after, knowing that historic city planning wasn't important anymore in those times.

Thank you again for the info, thundercrack.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: pickled_pig on April 09, 2007, 04:30:21 PM
Quote from: thundercrack83 on April 09, 2007, 10:13:53 AM
Aaron: Unfortunately, that agreement was broken in 1987, when One Liberty Place (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Liberty_Place) was built in Philadelphia. And I have that to thank for the Phillies not winning the World Series in 1993...That and Mitch Williams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Williams#1993_World_Series)...

I should know that (and actually I do - I guess there was a subtlety in the wording that changed the apparent meaning... who knows...?) as I was born in Philly and lived for 5 years in a Philly suburb.  Anyway, it's great to see some more discussion on the idea.  If anyone has any ideas on a potential mid-rise building that is architecturally unique, it'd be great to see it.

How about...
This (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=17496)
or this (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=16578)
or maybe this (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=14502)

There are probably better choices - that was just the result of 15 minutes on the STEX.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: barnatom on April 10, 2007, 09:18:24 AM
How about this:

(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstex.simtropolis.com%2Flots%2Fodainsaker%2Fodainsaker_tower%2520life%2520building%2Fprevtwlb%252Ejpg&hash=bf68bd4c69cdc1629df432bd6801b88b0c5ab445)

Tower Life Building (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/details.cfm?id=16648&v=1) by Odainsaker.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 10, 2007, 04:55:58 PM
That looks like a pretty good one, barnatom!
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: BigSlark on April 10, 2007, 04:57:46 PM
I feel that it should be a building from before the steel and glass era and around 30 stories.

Has anyone else played with c.p.'s new houses? All I have to say is that all of my European and Aussie houses are getting uninstalled.

Cheers,
Kevin
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: threestooges on April 10, 2007, 08:31:41 PM
I've have them. I don't have many/any euro/aussie lots but I can't seem to get  c.p.'s stuff to grow (yet). Is there a trick to it?
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: BigSlark on April 10, 2007, 08:59:26 PM
No, not that I can tell. I had a I-M town grow them very quickly when I zoned new 2x2 and 2x3 Light Residential zones. I had the area watered, if that helps at all.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Zaphod on April 10, 2007, 09:38:07 PM
IMO, I think it would be cool to have at least one modest sized postmodern building to symbolize the city entering the modern era(or is it declining?)
NDEX Biogen Tower
(https://www.sc4devotion.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstex.simtropolis.com%2Flots%2Fequinox%2Fequinox_ndex%2520biogen%2520tower%2520by%2520eb%2520and%2520dt%2Fbiogen%255F1%252Ejpg&hash=b4400528b729520b859c02d4dfed6b768c13180d)
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 10, 2007, 09:49:13 PM
Zaphod: I agree with you. I wouldn't mind seeing some more modern buildings to show that Pineshore is developing, however, we'll have to wait to hear from David because I'm sure he has the entire thing planned out in his head, as far as the backstory and the history end of things.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: pickled_pig on April 11, 2007, 02:33:04 PM
Quote from: Zaphod on April 10, 2007, 09:38:07 PM
Anyways, as for the other thing, I guess we need to know from dedgren what his vision of Pineshore is and what its history is to make a better decision

Yeah - agree completely.  The Biogen Tower's a great building choice as well - I considered it briefly as a signature building possibility - if only it were taller. So far, my vote goes to the Tower Life building, though, as I think the skyline would look better with an old building as its signatre building.

as for c.p's houses, you've got to be in the Chicago tileset for them to grow.  They've been popping up throughout the city I am currently building - soon it'll be hard to imagine what the game was like without c.p's houses - they fill an essential niche that nobody else has tried to fill yet.

-aaron
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 11, 2007, 02:35:48 PM
By the way, where can I find c.p.'s new houses? Are they on the LEX?
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Tarkus on April 11, 2007, 03:25:36 PM
Dustin, I believe c.p. has uploaded a couple house packs onto the LEX, the Early 19th Century American series.  I had the lower wealth ones installed and they were growing like weeds in Argentum's southern suburbs. 

I just found the new R$$ pack a few minutes ago, and I haven't messed around with them yet, but from the pics, they actually look exactly like Early 21st Century Oregon Homes.  I don't know what Midwestern suburban subdivisions exactly look like though, but I concur with Aaron (pickled_pig) that these do fill a nice niche, and they are at least something I've wanted/needed desperately for a long time. 

As far as the big tall buildings go, I think that both the Tower Life and the Biogen buildings are very good choices.  The Biogen does look a bit on the short side (my rough guesstimate of its height would be about 20 stories), so it would really depend on how much we want to limit that factor of Pineshore.  I'd be curious to see what David thinks.

-Alex

Edit as of 4:01pm PDT, 4/12/2007: I should have an announcement about the RHW within the next couple of days. ;)
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: mightygoose on April 13, 2007, 05:23:09 PM
i would have said that don miguel and marczar stuff was compulsory, for urban renewal you could drop in some dusktrooper lofts, much of the new ITS stuff, BLaM's Haven Lofts.


as for signature buildings, i live UK and the graduation of density from rural to urban is much shallower. my town of 140,000 residents has a tallest building with 15 floors, a second with 13, a third with 10 and then nothing over 6
but in america i reckon 20 - 25 floors would be appropriate.
my candidates for suggestion

probably the single most underappreciated release on the STEX [linkie] (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=13230)

29 floors this one so abit high but nice and distinctive [linkie] (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=14583)

this would need to be relotted [linkie] (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=13229)

there was one more 1920's style one... ill dig out a pic from my region.

Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: dedgren on April 13, 2007, 06:13:21 PM
I'm going to read through all this really carefully and will be posting a synopsis/my thoughts later tonight.

Thanks for your patience- I'm literally beset by RL stuff,


David
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 13, 2007, 10:33:11 PM
Hey, Alex! Thanks for the heads-up on those houses, I got them downloaded!

mightygoose: You're right about those buildings. They're not only great, but underappreciated. This was the first time I've seen them, and I just downloaded all three of them.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: vab423 on April 13, 2007, 11:33:05 PM
Quote from: dedgren on April 13, 2007, 06:13:21 PM

Thanks for your patience- I'm literally beset by RL stuff,
Hopefully, not bubbles (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/ap_on_fe_st/sudsy_streets;_ylt=ArrP7xcvTKUY_sX2Vm4qfBhH2ocA)!   :P
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: BigSlark on April 14, 2007, 11:10:15 PM
I hope RLS isn't horrible this weekend, David.

I assume that RHW is now a must for 3RR Collaboration?  ;)

Hope everyone's weekend is going well. If I get my RHW conflict figured out soon I'll post the good Midwestern houses I have installed to this thread, just to give people ideas.

Cheers,
Kevin
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: thundercrack83 on April 15, 2007, 10:31:44 AM
vab423: That article is hilarious! Could you imagine all those soap bubbles all over the streets?!!?
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: vab423 on April 15, 2007, 07:46:15 PM
Yeah, sorry for going off-topic, but I thought Wasilla was close to where D. Edgren lived and would find this amusing.  (thanks for getting a chuckle, thundercrack).  I'm leaving now.   %BUd%
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: barnatom on April 16, 2007, 04:48:41 PM
In case you haven't seen it allready, I have started a topic about the plugins collection to use in our 3RR project.

Please have a look and leave your comments here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=1006.msg28276#msg28276).


Thomas
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Pat on April 24, 2007, 08:34:24 PM
Quote from: dedgren on April 13, 2007, 06:13:21 PM
I'm going to read through all this really carefully and will be posting a synopsis/my thoughts later tonight.

Thanks for your patience- I'm literally beset by RL stuff,


David

David hi ummm i thinks its a little much later lol.
I was also wondering is all assigned yet? - pat
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: dedgren on May 14, 2007, 10:44:42 PM
LOL, Pat- It's much later (and several 100 posts deep in our Collaboration Team private threads), but this thread is now back up active for public comment, and we hope we'll see some as the results of our common plugins folder development effort begins to filter out to the outside world.


David
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: meinhosen on May 17, 2007, 08:02:29 AM
David, I'm not sure if your team has thought of using this (http://www.simtropolis.com/stex/index.cfm?id=12577) building for a low-rise downtown building.  I've always enjoyed seeing it grow in my cities and thought that it might fit in well with your project.
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: barnatom on May 18, 2007, 06:19:14 AM
Thank you, meinhosen, for suggesting the 'Deco Incorporated'.

Well, nothing is decided yet, but it is on the suggestion list and I don't see any reasons, why it shouldn't make it into the final collection.

Thomas
Title: Re: General Discussion
Post by: Thundercry on August 20, 2007, 10:48:26 PM
I am wondering is it's not too late to join the collaboration. ()what() If I can i'd like to get something rural (small town) with a freeway and/or a rail line.