RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[Tarkus]

^My thoughts exactly.  In official NAM terminology, bridges go over water, viaducts/overpasses go over land.  A lot of users who ask questions, especially about new features, tend to use these terms interchangeably, so whenever someone says "bridge", I usually have to ask if they actually mean "bridge" or if they really mean "viaduct/overpass".  (Similar to how the modern newbie phrase "I'm new to modding" creates confusion as to whether the individual is trying to create or install mods.)

But those are the actual definitions we use.

More work on L1 viaducts (not bridges).  They're coming along swimmingly (but not across water).



-Alex

[sunv123]

Hey, pretty nice! Just a quick question, are those overpasses puzzle pieces or just drag, because it looks like drag from my eye.


It seems like a lot of people get those two terms mixed, the new high speed rail system built in china said that it is a "bridge", but I've been on it and it's mostly on land!

[Tarkus]

Those are indeed draggable.  You won't need the puzzle pieces anymore, which is especially fortuitous, as if we made puzzle pieces for every combination now possible with the multi-height networking, we'd be looking at several hundred.

-Alex

[sunv123]

That's a relief, it won't be like right now, searching through all of those pieces takes a ton of time.

[GDO29Anagram]

That's a relief, it won't be like right now, searching through all of those pieces takes a ton of time.

All it took was 24 lines of RUL-2 code when it was previously thought it would take tons of INRUL-14 code for a seemingly impossible feat. What I'm talking about is the ability to draw out multiple same-network crossings without it becoming a horrendous mess of orthogonal T-crossings. Try it yourself; It ain't pretty.

-----

Here's a math problem:

There are 11 RHW networks: MIS, 2, 3, 4, 6S, 8S, 10S, 12S, 6C, 8C, and 10C. There are actually technically 13 RHW networks, due to the modularity of the S-networks and C-networks, so it's really MIS, 2, 3, 4, 6S, 8S inner, 8S outer, 10S outer, 12S outer, 6C median, 6C outer, 8C outer, and 10C outer, but for these purposes, there are 11.

There are five height levels of RHW networks: L0, L1, L2, L3, and L4 (Please, I beg you, don't just say ERHW, because that could mean L1 through L4). Every network has an L0, L1, and L2 version, but only MIS, 4, and 6S have L3 and L4 counterparts.

There are four types of crossings: Ortho-ortho, ortho-diag, diag-ortho, and diag-diag. Only in cases where you have the same network width involved for both crossing networks (For example, RHW-2 over RHW-2) would ortho-diag and diag-ortho would be identical.

Additionally, due to how asymmetrical networks work out, they require more pieces than symmetrical networks. For example, diag L1 RHW-4 crossing over ortho RHW-2 requires two pieces, and if the RHW-2 were swapped out for an RHW-4, you may need double the pieces.

The current overpass pieces are cut into two pieces, so that they're just a single-tile puzzle piece each. All non-ortho-ortho crossing takes up two tiles.

With that in mind, had the RUL-2 breakthrough not happened, how many crossing pieces would be needed? Hint: More than 300.

[bremner19]

Thanks for your hard work, nonetheless.  Everyday I sign on anticipating the release.

[metarvo]

A lot of users who ask questions, especially about new features, tend to use these terms interchangeably, so whenever someone says "bridge", I usually have to ask if they actually mean "bridge" or if they really mean "viaduct/overpass".

I hear a lot of that stuff where I'm from.  People call overpasses "bridges" regularly, and the "Watch for Ice on Bridge" warning signs which have started popping up recently for the winter season are used on every bridge, viaduct, and overpass with the term "bridge."  Radio traffic reports, however, make a differentiation and warn of icy conditions on "bridges" and "overpasses."

The L1 additions are looking quite nice.  Keep up the good work, Alex. 

[Durfsurn]

Looking good guys.

[Wthrwyz]

Here's a math problem:

<snip>

With that in mind, had the RUL-2 breakthrough not happened, how many crossing pieces would be needed? Hint: More than 300.

Error 01 OVERFLOW. 

Well just taking into account the number of networks, level combinations, and directions, I'm calculating nearly 2400 different possibilities. I don't even want to try to wrap my head around the number of individual pieces required for each of those networks. My guess is that it reaches into the tens of thousands if not even the hundreds of thousands, especially if they all have to be sliced up into single-tile units.

[Tarkus]

Well just taking into account the number of networks, level combinations, and directions, I'm calculating nearly 2400 different possibilities. I don't even want to try to wrap my head around the number of individual pieces required for each of those networks. My guess is that it reaches into the tens of thousands if not even the hundreds of thousands, especially if they all have to be sliced up into single-tile units.

The main, merged RHW .dat file I'm working with has about 46,000 subfiles within it at present (it's 63MB uncompressed), and it doesn't include the starter pieces or FARHW content (which are currently in separate .dat files), nor does it have some still in-progress stuff.

And now for a little development pic-age . . . now that's one tall highway.



-Alex

[gn_leugim]

tall but usefull, great work 

[Gugu3]

OMG!!!that is amazing!!!This NAM will be the greatest addition to the game ever released!
keep it up!
Cheers
Gugu3

[GDO29Anagram]

inb4 Tis the season to be teasin'.

That is all.

[McDuell]

Here's a math problem:

<interesting stuff>

With that in mind, had the RUL-2 breakthrough not happened, how many crossing pieces would be needed? Hint: More than 300.

Hmm, just for fun I'd like to give it a try, but I'll calculate only the subset for all L0-L1 crossing pieces ...


- There are 13 (=:n) networks, 11 (=:n1) unidirectional and 2 (=:n2) bidirectional (symmetrical) ones.

- Lets define that directions always apply to the lower network.

For unidirectional pieces (dir), there are 4 possible different directions: N,E,S,W, or for diagonals Ne, Se, Sw, Nw.      
Symmetric pieces (sym) have 2 directions: NS and EW (NwSe and NeSw).

- Let's define that we call all possible directions for the upper network variations for a given direction of a lower piece.

Then I can obtain the following modifiers:


ortho x ortho

dir x dir:
- 4 possible directions with 2 variations each, so 4*2 =    8
-> (dd:=8)

sym x sym:
- 2 directions with 1 variation   each   
-> (ss:=2)

dir x sym:
- 4 directions with 1 variation each
-> (ds:=4)

sym x dir:
- 2 directions with 2 variations each
-> (sd:=4)


Now, the actual calculation begins. There are 13 Networks. Each network may overpass any other network, so I use the binomial formula

-> (n1 + n2)²

for all possible crossings and expand it.

-> n1² + n1n2 + n1n2 + n2²

Now, I multiply these terms with the before calculated modifiers

-> dd*n1² + ds*n1n2 + sd*n1n2 + ss*n2²

to get the total number of different ortho-ortho crossing pieces. The result is 1152 pieces.




The ortho x diag, diag x ortho and diag x diag modifiers all share the same numbers, so I just listed the ortho x diag part below.


ortho x diag

dir x dir:
- 4 directions, 4 variations each            16

sym x sym:
- 2 directions, 2 variations               4

dir x sym:
- 4 directions, 2 variations               8

sym x dir:
- 2 directions, 4 variations               8


I take the new modifiers and evaluate the formula again, which results in 2304. Right? No, I have to multiply the number by 2 as any diagonal overpass actually consists of two pieces, as Ganaram said before. so the total number here is 4608! I multiply this number again by 3 to also cover the diag x ortho and diag x diag setups.

-> I get a grand total of 14976 (3*4608 + 1152) unique L0-L1 crossing pieces needed to fully cover all RHW based networks in any given direction.


How many errors did I make ? 



Anyways, you all did and do a massive amount of great work here; for this I congratulate you! 

[GDO29Anagram]

How many errors did I make ?

Well, given this:

The main, merged RHW .dat file I'm working with has about 46,000 subfiles within it at present

And the fact that a crossing/overpass piece consists of an S3D, path file, and exemplar, you'd need to divide 46000 by 3, which is about 15000. I'd reckon you're about there, give or take 1000.

Of course, I didn't account for every other network... 

But there's a reason I didn't: Once you introduce a non-dirtroad (non-RHW) network, it no longer is under the field of INRUL-13 and 14. It's now under RUL-1. Remember that RUL0 to RUL2 controls interactions between two different networks, and that the INRULs control just one network's interactions with itself. This is why you can crisscross multiple adjacent stretches of diagonal Rail with multiple stretches of diagonal Road with no problem, but why it breaks down when you crisscross Road with Road.

It was back in page 400-something that Alex announced he worked around the INRUL problem using only RUL-2 code. You'd think it ain't that big a deal (or worse, you won't get it at all), but it's a really important step towards making things less RUL-0 dependent. There's already a lot of RHW-RHW overpass puzzle pieces already...

[jondor]

14976 comes pretty close to the total number of models (only base network and crossings, almost no ramps or transitions included in this figure).  Add to the number of models a couple hundred L0 texture-based intersections and you hit the number even closer.  I never actually sat down and counted, but 14976 could only be off by no more than 3%.

[noahclem]

More work on L1 viaducts (not bridges).  They're coming along swimmingly (but not across water).

That just made my evening    Sometimes it's the little things in life I guess. Anyway, things are looking great as always 

[vinlabsc3k]

Wow Alex, it's great the L4(?) overpass.

And now for a little development pic-age . . . now that's one tall highway.



-Alex

It's very useful for me because I like to build in mountainous maps and often I need to cross a gorge or a narrow valley.

I hope that there's diagonals (L3-L4) and on-slope diagonal (at least L1-L2) too!!

More work on L1 viaducts (not bridges).  They're coming along swimmingly (but not across water).



-Alex

Ah, Have you made the OxD, DxO and DxD overpass for rail and GHSR?

PS.: There's a bug on the OxO overpass with GHSR, the carriageways are inverted.

[Swordmaster]

Now, that's what I call a high-way.

More work on L1 viaducts (not bridges).  They're coming along swimmingly (but not across water).

That just made my evening    Sometimes it's the little things in life I guess. Anyway, things are looking great as always 

Yes, although in Siilijoki, you'll make these viaducts swimmingly cross water anyway.

Cheers
Willy

[Tarkus]

Wow Alex, it's great the L4(?) overpass.

It is indeed an L4.

I hope that there's diagonals (L3-L4) and on-slope diagonal (at least L1-L2) too!!

Every height level of every RHW network will have diagonal functionality in the next release.  I'm not sure whether or not we'll have diagonal on-slopes, as none have been made yet on the RHW side.  They're definitely planned.  It's just a matter of "when". 

Ah, Have you made the OxD, DxO and DxD overpass for rail and GHSR?

PS.: There's a bug on the OxO overpass with GHSR, the carriageways are inverted.
[/size][/font]

The RHW side of the Rail and GHSR crossings of those is coded, and it's just a matter of porting it to the different RHW networks.  The coding to extend GHSR itself to accept those crossings without deconverting to Monorail hasn't been done yet in most cases.  As far as the "bug" you mentioned, we've gutted all the old code that handles that overpass, so there should be no issue there going forward. 

At this point, we've basically stopped supporting and maintaining Version 5.0 of the RHW, and we will not be addressing any bug reports pertaining to it.  While "Mark 2" of the Project 57 RHW is not ready for release (before anyone asks "when?", I'll add "when its ready"), it's almost to the point of being functional enough to replace Version 5.0 systems.

More work on L1 viaducts (not bridges).  They're coming along swimmingly (but not across water).

That just made my evening    Sometimes it's the little things in life I guess. Anyway, things are looking great as always 

Hehe. I'm glad someone caught onto my word choices there.

-Alex