RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[strucka]

Will the GLR under/over RHW be included in the new NAM? Because all you are showing us here are the old maxis networks interacting with the RHW. Is that just such a choice of pictures, or is that because GLR are that much harder to get ready and are not really as stable yet? And the same question also stands for NWM. Will it be in the NAM 31 or will we have to wait for those interactions until the NAM 32?

Great job otherwise, my downtown area really needs L1+ RHW6+ networks to run around it and through it.

[Tarkus]

I know this probably won't be included in the next NAM, considering all the ground-breaking developments, but would it be possible to include a RHW10 to RHW8 and RHW4 F-2 exit. I'd like to make an eight-lane freeway, but any two lane exit I make leaves me with only a six lane highway left. There's RHW8 to RHW6 and FARHW4 but none like what I described above (nor is there any like the RHW6 to RHW4 & C2 exit for RHW8 or 10).

Actually, I believe that particular ramp design would be an RHW-10 Type C2, as one of the lanes is an option lane, which continues on but allows exits.  We're still working out some base network stability right now, so we haven't really looked at what we'll have for on/offramps next release, plus we're transitioning toward the FLEXRamp paradigm, so that makes it a little hazier still.

Will the GLR under/over RHW be included in the new NAM? Because all you are showing us here are the old maxis networks interacting with the RHW. Is that just such a choice of pictures, or is that because GLR are that much harder to get ready and are not really as stable yet? And the same question also stands for NWM. Will it be in the NAM 31 or will we have to wait for those interactions until the NAM 32?

I've coded for GLR crossings on the RHW side.  You haven't seen many most likely because most of the code handling the GLR side of those over/underpasses hasn't been written yet.  Whenever two override networks interact, there needs to be code for both networks to handle the crossing.  This is why crosslink setups are so difficult.

As far as the NWM goes, it'll at least be partially supported.  The extant transitions between RHW and NWM networks (no RHW-8S-to-OWR-4 or RHW-10S-to-OWR-5 right now, before anyone asks) have already been ported over to work with P57 RHWs, and are functioning.  Intersection/overpass-wise, here's how things look to be headed:

• All OXO at-grades present in NAM 30/RHW 5.0/NWM 2.0 will be supported in NAM 31.  No at-grades involving diagonal NWM x RHW setups will be supported.
• Orthogonal RHW x Orthogonal NWM and Diagonal RHW x Orthogonal NWM overpasses will be supported for all elevated (L1, L2, etc.) RHWs and NWM networks.  Situations involving diagonal NWM networks may only be supported by single-tile NWM networks (e.g. no Ortho RHW x Diag AVE-6)

-Alex

[Indiana Joe]

I know there's going to be 5 levels of RHW (including ground level), but how many levels of default network viaducts will there be?  There will at least be 7.5m right?

[GDO29Anagram]

I know there's going to be 5 levels of RHW (including ground level), but how many levels of default network viaducts will there be?  There will at least be 7.5m right?

1. Just 7.5 and 15 meters.
2. It's nowhere in our NAM 31 plans.

[jcluvzgamez]

What happened to L-3 and L-4? I thought those would be released too 

[Tarkus]

Ganaram was referring to the Road, One-Way Road, Avenue, and Railroad viaducts.  The RHW-4, RHW-6S, and MIS are still planned to include L3 and L4 versions in NAM 31.

-Alex

[sunv123]

Just a quick question, will there be different height level FLEXfly Ramps? Like L1 and L3? They would come in handy in some situations. Oh, that brings up another question, if there are, can you put different levels on top of each other?

[AngryBirdsFan436]

So what? L3 and L4 RHW-6S, RHW-4 and MIS won't be included in NAM 31?   

[Tarkus]

So what? L3 and L4 RHW-6S, RHW-4 and MIS won't be included in NAM 31? 

Re-read my post.  I just said they would be included.

Just a quick question, will there be different height level FLEXfly Ramps? Like L1 and L3? They would come in handy in some situations. Oh, that brings up another question, if there are, can you put different levels on top of each other?

As far as FLEXFly goes, you'll have to wait to see.   By different levels on top of each other, what exactly do you mean?

-Alex

[sunv123]

As in crossing them. Seems like it's a little over the top but it might be possible. Not expecting it to be in NAM 31 though.

Wish I could show you a pic of what I mean, but I'll be on mobile for awhile.

[AngryBirdsFan436]

Oh, I just misread your post! They're indeed going to be in NAM 31!  Well, are their more teasefest on our way before 3/1? I want to see a stack interchange in action! SO EXCITED I can't wait for 3/1!

[Tarkus]

As in crossing them. Seems like it's a little over the top but it might be possible. Not expecting it to be in NAM 31 though.

You mean like an L4 crossing over an L3?  If so, that's definitely in the cards.

Well, are their more teasefest on our way before 3/1?

Yes, you can be sure we'll have more teasers before release.  It's been quiet recently because we've been occupied with some RL, and the more technical aspects of the development process, which don't lend themselves to teasers.  I suspect it'll be quiet for a little while longer, while we pick up steam again.

-Alex

[Indiana Joe]

A felxfly crossing another flexfly?  That would be freakin awesome.  Would probably take quite a few intersection models, though.  I think I'll file that one away in "speculation for NAM 33..."

[Tarkus]

A felxfly crossing another flexfly?  That would be freakin awesome.  Would probably take quite a few intersection models, though.  I think I'll file that one away in "speculation for NAM 33..."

I was thinking he was just meaning the levels themselves, not FLEXFly-over-FLEXFly at those levels.  Yes, I'd file that one away for now.

-Alex

[GDO29Anagram]

Somepony compute for me the number of possible ways that a FlexFly can be stacked with another, then explain why that would be very very difficult.

If it's just FlexFly over/under standard RHW, that'll be fine and dandy; Just a matter of copypasta-ing pre-existing RUL-2 code and making new models and paths. The next problem is meeting our own deadline, in which case if it doesn't, it's for NAM 32.

Oh, and additionally, somepony try to create a diagonal RD-4 crossing with a diagonal RHW-2 and see if that's any easy, and then explain why something like that won't be added this time around. Though I should mention that it's a simple matter of going into RUL-1 and fiddling with the Road-Dirtroad crossings so that a DxD like that can be made possible, like with all crossings... Ever.

And for those curious as to why it's only RHW-4, RHW-6S, and MIS that's being given L3's and L4's, have you ever seen anything wider than those being elevated in real-life? And no, bridges (and I mean bridges over water and wildly uneven terrain) don't count.

[MandelSoft]

From what he have in development, P57 is uncompressed 151MB already, of which 75.4 MB is FlexFly alone. That's a very heavy component already...

[Durfsurn]

wow dat FLEX-Fly!

[kody_organmaster]

I am about ready to burst with excitement !!! 

[sunv123]

Yeah, too far.

[AngryBirdsFan436]

So there are going to be L1, L3 and L4 FlexFLYs, right? And also, another question, will the on-slope transitions of the ERHWs have "automatic slope" feature? Where the transition will elevate a certain part of the terrain to 7.5 M/15 M, etc. It would be useful because we don't have a 7.5 M ground lifter, hole digging lot. Also the same for L3 and L4! Although, I'm not really expecting an on-slope transition for L3 and L4!