RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[Shadow Assassin]

Aaah, the wideness!

Mmm, high capacity, here we come!

[RebaLynnTS]

Keep up the good work, guys. Now if we can just get the RAM off the ground

[el_cozu]

Back with development . . .

Somewhere, over the RHW-6S . . .



(or RHW-6C)



Adding those to the 8S, 8C and 10 will just be a copy-paste.

By the way, the poll is still very, very close, with "by number of lanes" still holding a slight edge (it had been down to 2, but has gone up a little now).  I'll leave the poll open through Monday.

-Alex (Tarkus)

hey.... i think it looks good without the center column... most bridges dont have a center column over a highway... just leave it as it is

[debutterfly]

Great work Tarkus (Alex)...If possible, could you show us some development on the El-RHW. Also, will the El-RHW be wider than just 4 lanes? Just curious...will El-MIS be included in v21 as seen in your MD earlier on? Is there any plans for orthogonal MIS ramps for v21 and orthogonal overpasses. (ex. ---//--- or ===/=== for overpasses and \\ | for on/off ramps.)  Anyway, seems like v21 will come out sooner than it did between
                                                                              \\|
                                                                               \\
v13 and v20 since there won't be a whole revamping as was done between v13 and v20. ..I'm a programmer so I understand versions and builds and how they deal with the infastructure of the program itself.   Also wondering, what did/are you majoring in?  

[RebaLynnTS]

The current model for the raised roads looks to weak without the center support, and most of the highways I drive on do have center supports on the road bridges, over the highway.

[simzebu]

I usually see a center support, too. Though, I don't go on big highways much, and the bridges I do see don't look anything like the NAM overpasses. Anyway, I think that, though it may be possible, the look of the bridge would be better with a center support.

[thundercrack83]

Wow, the new wider RHWs look amazing, Alex! Keep up the fantastic work, my friend!

[CabraBuitre]

I don't know about elsewhere, but in Illinois and Wisconsin, overpasses ALWAYS have a center support.

[DFire870]

It usually depends on the width of the highway, as well as how wide the center median is. Here I've seen overpasses that have two central supports in the median (because the median is wide enough to allow the highway plenty of room for future expansion), as well as highways that have one, but I don't think I've seen one that has no central support. Most of the highways that have a jersey barrier as the only means of separation between the two sides of the highway has the central supports built into the jersey barrier.

-- John

[BigSlark]

Great work on the RHW-6C pieces, Alex. However, I must ask everyone to stop bothering Alex about the center supports for the RHW-6C overpass. He's said that he's going to look into it and its been stated before that the RHW system is currently about functionality, eye candy will come later. So lets all be patient and see what the NAM Team comes up with.

Cheers,
Kevin

[RebaLynnTS]

Of-course, both kinds could be included. But until everything works good, it don't matter much.

[Tarkus]

Glad to hear everyone likes the new developments.

To answer your questions, debutterfly, the El-RHW and El-MIS are kind of in an interesting situation.  The modding aspect is more or less done on them--I've been able to make the overrides work simply with a copy-paste of the ground RHW/ground MIS overrides, and becuase of that, it will, in fact, be possible to widen the El-RHW (up to El-RHW-10).  The models used for the Elevated networks are a different story, and that's where the hangup lies in getting those networks ready.  blahdy has completed a fantastic looking (as usual) orthogonal El-RHW-4 model, as shown a few pages back, but we've been having difficulty getting it into the game, due to various logistics issues with pieces of software and file formats.  Whether or not the Elevated stuff will be in v21 really depends on if we can get this situation worked out.  And by those offramp/overpasses, did you mean diagonal/orthogonal?  If so, I'm planning to improve the diagonal aspect of the mod with v21.

As far as the gap between v20 and v21 being shorter than that between v13 and v20, it's certainly possible, but I can't really make any guarantees.  I'm only calling it v21 in order to make it a consecutive number, but given the numbering scheme it was given in the past, it may be more like v30.

And by the way, I'm a music composition major, on the second year of my doctorate.

Hope that answers your questions.

-Alex (Tarkus)

[dragonshardz]

we may have to wait for El-MIS and El-RHW until v21b, then?

[debutterfly]

And by those offramp/overpasses, did you mean diagonal/orthogonal?  If so, I'm planning to improve the diagonal aspect of the mod with v21.

yes...I meant diagonal. Thanks for the update and all of your time put in to such a great super-modd. 

[Filasimo]

Posted by: dragonshardz
we may have to wait for El-MIS and El-RHW until v21b, then?

Tarkus: Whether or not the Elevated stuff will be in v21 really depends on if we can get this situation worked out.  And by those offramp/overpasses, did you mean diagonal/orthogonal?  If so, I'm planning to improve the diagonal aspect of the mod with v21.

Please make sure to read Alex post next time kay?  There is no point in releasing "b" versions anymore due to the fact that v13b was created to be compatible with an upcoming NAM release in the past. If we are not able to have it ready for V21 it will be in the next version after v21.

[Tarkus]

Hi everyone-

The poll is now closed.  Thanks to all 159 of you who voted!  I appreciate the feedback.

The final tally is as follows:

By type (Starters, Overpasses, Transitions, etc.)----69 (43.4%)
By number of lanes (MIS, RHW-2, RHW-4, RHW-6, etc.)----82 (51.6%)
Keep them all lumped together as is (all under one button)----8 (5%)

It was pretty close between the top two options throughout, so I think there's a good possibility I may see if I can merge the two somehow . . .

-Alex (Tarkus)

[JoeST]

or maybe an option could be available? on install you choose between Number of Lanes and Type, (number of lanes being the default of course  )

Joe

[Andreas]

or maybe an option could be available? on install you choose between Number of Lanes and Type, (number of lanes being the default of course  )

Well, that's exactly why we started the poll in the first place - the NAM Controller defines the order, and there can only be one (otherwise we'd have to maintain multiple NAM Controllers forever, and this is both confusing and a lot of work).

[JoeST]

That makes sense, sorry I forgot about that problem 

woops

Joe

[thundercrack83]

Well, I voted for "by type," but personally, I'm more than happy with either option. Whatever you come up with, Alex, will definitely suffice for me!