NWM (Network Widening Mod) - Development and Support

[ivo_su]

Nice.

Is there an ARD-3 Lanes Shift piece to change the direction of the middle lane? I have been looking through my tab rings to no avail.

I have a road that is so ready for AVE-6. Right now it's two OWR-2s with a grassy median, but soon...

Oh believe me I have a few cities in my region who yearn for AVE-6 than 1 year but anyway to quieten it remained little more. I was forced to delay the development of my big cities and especially suburban and central parts. However, NAM 30 and NWM 2.0 will be immensely helpful especially after the introduction of diagonal networks NWM.

Ivo

[TJ1]

Tarkus said this in the NWM thread at simtropolis, "Diagonal intersections: Likely for some single-tile networks, unlikely for dual-tile networks, and very unlikely for triple-tile networks." Does that mean like dual and triple tile networks wont have diagonal intersections for ver 3.0 or they will never exist at all ?

[Tarkus]

Tarkus said this in the NWM thread at simtropolis, "Diagonal intersections: Likely for some single-tile networks, unlikely for dual-tile networks, and very unlikely for triple-tile networks." Does that mean like dual and triple tile networks wont have diagonal intersections for ver 3.0 or they will never exist at all ?

All those statements were made in regards to the next release, NWM Version 2.0.  Dual and triple-tile networks will get diagonal intersections at some point in a future release, but probably not this next one.

-Alex

[TJ1]

phew!!! Thanks Tarkus 

[Ramona Brie]

AVE-6 makes me salivate...

[Exla357]

Hey guys, to alleviate any doubts:

The new YouTube user, "ErwinNegentigNo2," is not ErwinNegentig, merely someone who managed to save all his videos and descriptions on a private disk and reupload them. More information can be found at his channel.
Thank you.

-Alex

[GDO29Anagram]

The new YouTube user, "ErwinNegentigNo2," is not ErwinNegentig, merely someone who managed to save all his videos and descriptions on a private disk and reupload them.

Didn't I point that out when I found that video? (Yeah, making the text small was probably ill-advised...)

DISCLAIMER: It's actually someone who managed to preserve some of his videos.[/sub][/sub][/sub]

Well, not all of his videos; EN's original RHW video is not up... (And it's a good one, too; It showed how old and archaic RHW once was...) The "Why use the NAM" vid was something that I felt was four years outdated, though...

[ivo_su]

Tarkus said this in the NWM thread at simtropolis, "Diagonal intersections: Likely for some single-tile networks, unlikely for dual-tile networks, and very unlikely for triple-tile networks." Does that mean like dual and triple tile networks wont have diagonal intersections for ver 3.0 or they will never exist at all ?

So let me to deposit some clarity about the NWM or at least try to do as far as I can. This is one of the last projects of the NAM and in particular Tarkus (Alex). However, this idea see the light of day for less than 10 months is pretty young to require a lot of it.
NWM is the beginning of a long road that needs to go but I'm sure that at some point there will be diagonal crossings, elevated networks and a huge variety of splitters and pieces.
As most of you are aware of the release of version 2.0 which will have 2 additional networks
- AVE - 6 (my dream)
- TLA - 7
and elevated EMAVE-4 moreover, it is clear that broad networks will have a diagonal function.
Whether will then go to version 3.0 or to something like 2.1 is not yet clear. From my conversations with Alex, however, know that one of the priorities is to gradually appear elevated networks, perhaps also gradually appear and diagonal crossings (first of two tiles networks, and then three tiles networks).
In version 3.0 will surely see
AVE-8
TLA-9
Alex is likely to design something like MAVE-8 and OWR-6. In the back pages this has been discussed and I think he took to heart the idea.
That's all I know about the project at present and its future. If anyone knows more let me add information.
I hope I was helpful.

Ivo

[Tarkus]

That's basically correct as far as the current plans go . . . except the new MAVE thing this time around is the single-tile Narrow MAVE-4 (NMAVE-4), not the Elevated MAVE-4.

-Alex

[ivo_su]

The error was mine then and thanks for the clarification.
If there is something new for future versions please share.

Ivo

[Rady]

Returned to SC4 after nearly one year of absence due to RL matters, and browsed through tons of posts  , but didn't find anything, so may I just ask: is there any developement for NWM bridges under way?

[Tarkus]

There's not really been any concerted effort toward NWM bridges.  I wouldn't anticipate any as part of the next release cycle.

-Alex

[Exla357]

@Rady:

As for the current NWM bridges, not that much work needs to go into them:

TLA 3/AVE 2: Just convert to road and use road bridge. (I doubt you'll need a turning lane over water  )
TLA 5/MAVE 4/MAVE 6: Use avenue converter and avenue bridge (Either you give or take a median, or lose a lane, not too big of a deal)
OWR 1-5: Use OWR-2 or RHW-4 bridge. (You may want to use multiple adjacent bridges as not to lose capacity)

-Alex 

[GDO29Anagram]

TLA 3/AVE 2: Just convert to road and use road bridge. (I doubt you'll need a turning lane over water  )
TLA 5/MAVE 4/MAVE 6: Use avenue converter and avenue bridge (Either you give or take a median, or lose a lane, not too big of a deal)

Several notes:
- The TLA bridge would be designed without turn paths, and is also compatible with AVE-2.
- There's also an in-game bridge that almost fits the criteria of being a MAVE-4 bridge. (It just needs a bit of model-tweeking...)
- OWR bridges 1 to 3 would be made using plain OWR. OWR bridges 4 and 5 would be made using Avenue. (I'd dip it, just in case...)
- Bridges for AVE-6/TLA-7 (and the yet-to-be-implemented AVE-8/TLA-9) would either have to use the zero-slope method or parallel OWR bridges. If using parallel OWR bridges, this would require new AVE to OWR pieces.

Other than the obvious need for a MAVE-6 and ARD-3 bridge and other OWR bridge widths, it should be noted that the purpose of having bridges for all other networks is purely for continuity.

[ivo_su]

This bridge is a very interesting topic and some things  intrigued  me. The idea to use the RHW-4 for bridge OWR made ​​me wonder will there be tours for NWM to RHW. I think there are several  very good splitter that would be beautiful and at the same time effective (MAVE-6 to RHW-6 or AVE-6/RHW-6, OWR-5 to RHW-10c, OWR-4 to RHW-8c)

Ivo

[Lach77]

I have a question about AVE-6. I saw the screenshots a few pages back and at the intersection they were 3 lanes each way with one left-turning lane (so 7 lanes wide at the intersection).

Will there be more TuLEP options for these roads. Judging by the existing TuLEPS/NWM creations you can fit 3 lanes wide per tile; i.e. 6 lanes for AVE-4 with 4 lanes + 2 for turning lanes.

My question is are there plans to have 9 lane AVE-6 roads (6 straight lanes - 3 each way, 2 left turning lanes and 1 dedicated right turning lane which becomes a slip lane (the current slip lanes don't really add all that much capacity).

Thanks for the all the hard work, NAM is making this game immortal.

[GDO29Anagram]

My question is are there plans to have 9 lane AVE-6 roads (6 straight lanes - 3 each way, 2 left turning lanes and 1 dedicated right turning lane which becomes a slip lane (the current slip lanes don't really add all that much capacity).

That's something for the TuLEPs thread, and I even answered that question a long time ago with a proposed TuLEP nomenclature. That would be along the lines of a G-TuLEP, but if the extra right lane converts to slip lane first (I've been picturing a right lane to slip lane piece, but haven't got that far), then it goes back to B-TuLEP.

I want to rearrange it, since Opkl brings up questions about an NMAVE TuLEP setup, and the "Lane-Reduction Right-Turn" and "Displaced Right Turn" setups feel like they need dedicated letters.

With that said, here's the entire order once again:

A - Single Left-Turn
B - Double Left-Turn
C - Displaced Right Turn (Ideal for a few OWR TuLEP setups)
D - Lane-Redux Right-Turn (Such as the MAVE-6 to MAVE-4 setup, or Opkl's example, that is, if I interpreted it correctly)

With the possible combinations:

E = (A+C)
F = (A+D)
G = (B+C)
H = (B+D)

None of which are being developed at the moment, though. Right now, the only AVE-6 TuLEPs being made are A and B.

Little note: Slip lanes DO help with capacity by allowing a direct route to turn right (or left, if you're LHD), so that traffic doesn't clog the intersection itself.

[Rady]

Just to get an idea: are there plans to add the missing (compared to "normal" Maxis roads / avenues) junction types for MAVE, ... Like a 90-degree-turn for the MAVE-4 (like the avenue 90-degree turn), or the MAVE-4 / ARD T-junction (see pic) ... and I suppose there are some more missing pieces, haven't tried all of them right now.

[Tarkus]

Just to get an idea: are there plans to add the missing (compared to "normal" Maxis roads / avenues) junction types for MAVE, ... Like a 90-degree-turn for the MAVE-4 (like the avenue 90-degree turn), or the MAVE-4 / ARD T-junction (see pic) ... and I suppose there are some more missing pieces, haven't tried all of them right now.

Suffice to say, both the ones you've mentioned I'm pretty sure are in the current alpha build.  I know I have textures for them.  Quite a number of those will be filled in this next release.

-Alex

[Ramona Brie]

I have several cases where a TLA-5 end at a road or an AVE-4 end at an AVE-2 would be nice.