NWM (Network Widening Mod) - Development and Support

[GDO29Anagram]

That image is extremely photoshopped.

WRONG!!! That was a promo by EA themselves, and that ain't even the bridge I was talking about...

This is:

There is nothing secret about this picture and nothing new,



This particullar bridge, you may have even built before NWM came out. In this situation, maybe its a sign of hope, because this is a Maxis bridge, and it almost allowed me to attach the road to it. I guess it could of been a fluke with the landscape that the avenue did not come out, but when I had dragged the bridge across, it allowed me to back up, and not extend the avenue out of it, that I was tempted to touch the Mave to it. If such a bridge was duplicated so the existing avenue bridge is untouched, the duplication would just need the ends of that center triangle cut off to match the Mave 4.

[Moonraker0]

That image is extremely photoshopped.

WRONG!!! That was a promo by EA themselves

What Nego means is that EA photoshopped the image; just look at some of the parts of it:  to point out a few, the avenue has dashed white lines and then solid yellow lines on one half of it for a small part of it, and the rail line is flat next to a bumpy road, plus the street intersection that doesn't actually have any connecting roads.

[Ramona Brie]

While SC4D was down I posted about a minor cosmetic error in the TLA-3 across MIS textures:

http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/topic/43008-nwm-network-widening-mod-development-and-support/page__pid__1169622#entry1169622

[Nego]

@GDO29Anagram: What Moonraker0 said is what I meant when I said that the image looked photoshopped. I already knew that it was a promo image by EA. Also, when I said that I thought that was the bridge you were referring to, I wasn't 100% sure. It was just a guess.

[Tarkus]

While SC4D was down I posted about a minor cosmetic error in the TLA-3 across MIS textures:

http://www.simtropolis.com/forum/topic/43008-nwm-network-widening-mod-development-and-support/page__pid__1169622#entry1169622

Thanks, Raymie!  Should be an easy fix to take care of, fortunately.

We're still slowly progressing forward.  The NWM's a bit farther off right now than the other plugins scheduled for the next release cycle (RHW 5.0 and NAM 30).  There's still quite a few intersections I'm in the process of putting together, and I haven't yet figured out solutions to a couple of lingering issues folks have reported with the existing version (the MAVE-6 weird arrows, which were not entirely solved with the patch I released, and the infamous texture artifacting some users saw on wealthified transition pieces).

-Alex

[Ramona Brie]

That said, I know I wouldn't mind a rough beta either to tide me over...SC4's getting boring, I have one month of summer left, and I really want some new stuff.

[Tarkus]

Knocking out some more intersections . . . slowly but surely.  Triple-tile networks can now end at dual-tile networks.





-Alex

[ivo_su]

Great to have done Alex and I'm definitely pleased with what he saw. Please only if you do not embarrass to show similar T-junction with the AVE-6 and OWR-4.

Ivo

[freshballin365]

@Tarkus:Great work Tarkus!  I have two questions for you: Will there be any transition between AVE-6 and OWR-3/MAVE-6? There could be an empty median (1 tile in width) between each OWR/MAVE Strip. To solve the issue of diagonal OWR not having neighbor connections, could the MAVE network be used like it already is for orthogonal instances?

[Korot]

With regards to the previous post: What's a MAV?
I do like the idea of a transition between AVE-6 and OWR-3, though as far as I know, they aren't included in the next NWM version. Perhaps for a future version?

BTW, Tarkus, the tables in the first post are currently a bit messed up, could you please clean them up a bit? Thank you! 

Regards,
Korot

[ivo_su]

With regards to the previous post: What's a MAV?
I do like the idea of a transition between AVE-6 and OWR-3, though as far as I know, they aren't included in the next NWM version. Perhaps for a future version?

BTW, Tarkus, the tables in the first post are currently a bit messed up, could you please clean them up a bit? Thank you! 

Regards,
Korot

I think that the MAV is short Maxis Avenue. I hope I was helpful for you.

[Tarkus]

@Tarkus:Great work Tarkus!  I have two questions for you: Will there be any transition between AVE-6 and OWR-3/MAV-6? There could be an empty median (1 tile in width) between each OWR/MAV Strip. To solve the issue of diagonal OWR not having neighbor connections, could the MAV network be used like it already is for orthogonal instances?

Thanks!  The only transition to/from the AVE-6 will be an AVE-4-to-6 transition.  There will also be a MAVE-6-to-Dual-OWR-3 transition, but no AVE-6-to-MAVE-6 or AVE-6-to-Dual-OWR-3.  Transitions are not easy to put together texture-wise and can take a fair bit of time.  I'll probably be looking at adding more in a smaller release sometime after NWM 2.0.  As far as OWR neighbor connections go, they'll probably be getting an RHW-style treatment at some point, though not in 2.0.

With regards to the previous post: What's a MAV?

I'd imagine he meant MAVE.

BTW, Tarkus, the tables in the first post are currently a bit messed up, could you please clean them up a bit? Thank you! 

I would, but unfortunately, I can't.  The table functionality is enabled by a forum plugin which hasn't yet been installed on the new forum--you'll notice tables in other threads on the site are in a similar state right now.

-Alex

[Ramona Brie]

You make me envious of that TLA-7 and AVE-6...

[GMT]

Since I am thinking about this for as long as I know that the TLA7 will be a 3-wide network for it made me curious:
is the difference in size between ingame and real TLA5/7 for cosmetical purposes?
I used to live pretty much at the corner of a N-S running TLA7 and a E-W running TLA5, with the TLA7 right out the driveway standing at an exact 32m (=2 tiles) incl sidewalks pretty much all along the road (give or take a meter here and there), while the TLA5 is accordingly smaller...

[jdenm8]

There's one main problem with 'real scale' networks.

They're too small.
Both Maxis and custom automata will smack/pass into/through each other as the lanes are narrower than the average car width.
Not to mention that it will look incredibly cramped compared to other networks (Most noticeably everything except Maxis Highway).

[Ramona Brie]

Speaking of the release front, things are moving forward.  As far as the full complement of what we're releasing this go-around, the NWM is being the "spoilsport" right now, and I may end up postponing some of its currently in-progress functionality until an NWM 2.x release, so there's less stuff to worry about and we can ensure a stable release sooner rather than later.  Additionally, unless something's already in the midst of development, I wouldn't anticipate any new requested functionality to make it into this release cycle.

Which features would be delayed? Hopefully not the diagonals, NMAVE or triple-tiles.

[noahclem]

Like jdenm8 mentioned the whole scale of automata and lane-width is off a bit in the game (the scale of everything else is off a bit too I'd say). But that doesn't really matter as long as it's all relatively equally off scale. I do hope that eventually the 3-tile networks are shrunk slightly though, with lane-widths equal to the new RHW v5 textures, though I'm sure that's nothing likely to happen anytime in the near future.

[Tarkus]

Which features would be delayed? Hopefully not the diagonals, NMAVE or triple-tiles.

The triple-tiles are definitely staying in, as is the NMAVE and the diagonal functionality for dual and triple-tiles.  If anything gets cut, it'll probably be in the realm of diagonal intersections for the single-tile networks.  The NMAVE might also not get wide-radius curves quite yet.  I've made considerable progress on the intersections in the past couple days (and some of the notoriously tricky ARD-3 ones ended up going far smoother than I expected), but still, I'm hedging my bets. 

I'm also looking at a "2.x series" release plan that would be similar to the 4.x (and now 5.x) plan that has been discussed with the RHW.  I haven't quite come up with any sort of preliminary "benchmark" for when we'd transition to 3.0, however. 

And to follow up on the tables as Korot mentioned, they're back to normal.  The Tabular mod has been reinstalled on the forum.

-Alex

[Ramona Brie]

Tarkus, you know that not every intersection has to be made. That can always be saved for 2.0.1 or 2.1 — get that stuff out now! 

(You're appreciated...but I'm starting to grow impatient for all this stuff.)

EDIT:

Haida County's test of NWM single tiles at MIS intersections came back...



The TLA-3, AVE-2, and both ARD-3 intersections require the same rotation treatment.

[Tarkus]

Tarkus, you know that not every intersection has to be made. That can always be saved for 2.0.1 or 2.1 — get that stuff out now! 

(You're appreciated...but I'm starting to grow impatient for all this stuff.)

I had on several occasions included the diagonal intersections for the single-tile networks as an item on the feature list, so I'd at least like to have something on that front.  I won't be T21ing them at this juncture, however, and the ones between two NWM networks are on the chopping block for this release.

Haida County's test of NWM single tiles at MIS intersections came back...

The TLA-3, AVE-2, and both ARD-3 intersections require the same rotation treatment.

Looking over the current build, actually, it seems I completely redid the MIS intersection textures to go along with the V5-Spec project.  No rotation/flipping needed.

-Alex