RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[Tarkus]

I can confirm it's not the Multi-Height System.

Is it something equally as powerful as the other two Secret Weapons? Is it those RHW-8 bridges I've seen poking out in your MD?

To answer those two questions: 1) Yes.  2) If they've shown up in an MD or elsewhere on the public boards before now, they're not secret.

I won't give any hints, however.  You'll just have to wait and see. We like to surprise people.

You should make a RHW-2 centered in-between 2 tiles. It would be useful for making 2-lane freeways designed for possible expansion to 4 lanes if needed. Also, a RHW-4>Centered RHW-2 transition, and a variant with 2 MIS ramps stemming from the outer lanes of the RHW-4 (like a Type-C ramp).
Also, it would make it a lot easier to build small, aesthetically pleasing interchanges where an RHW-4 diverges -one lane exiting, the other continuing to form a RHW-2 mainline.

You can basically already kind of do something along those lines with the MIS, and some existing and soon-to-be added splitters.  Just think of the MIS as an "RHW-2S" in that case.

-Alex

[ivo_su]

Were you able  to get the job done  with the creation of paths and are entering Phase I testing of networks pieces splitters, etc.
I know that making paths is a tedious and labor-intensive processes and perhaps work on the RUL. We'll all be happy if you left that stage behind your backs.

God save NAM
Ivo

[Ramona Brie]

Actually, Tarkus, those RHW-8 bridges were in mrtnrln's MD, not yours. That said, is Secret Weapon #3 something you use often?

[GDO29Anagram]

Actually, Tarkus, those RHW-8 bridges were in mrtnrln's MD, not yours. That said, is Secret Weapon #3 something you use often?

I believe Blue Lightning showed them off as well...

Plus, what part of "I won't give any hints, however.  You'll just have to wait and see. We like to surprise people. semicolon right parenthesis" don't you understand?

[Ramona Brie]

*growls* Hmm. I will have to wait, I guess. The NAM Team may be the champions of teasing.

[sumwonyuno]

Hello Tarkus,

I watched the double decker video and noticed the part about the route query not showing any road traffic.  Have you tried seeing the output of Query.txt?  Press SHIFT + CTRL + ALT and then query tool click on a section of double-decker RHW.  On Windows, a file called Query.txt will be created in your SimCity 4 Deluxe/Apps.  In the file, there should be data under one of the Edge Density Matrices; cars should be travel type 1.  I'm predicting there will be data in the cars travel type on a non-empty section of RHW.

[Hutts]

Remember many...many posts back that a flexfly RHW4 was in the works and there were never photos or too many disscussions about it afterwards.....it would be my guess for the next WMC

[jdenm8]

The problem is less "Does it know the data?" (it most likely does for everything except Monorail), but moreso, "Does the method it calls to retrieve the usage data retrieve the car travel type's data?" Judging by the fact it's not returned to the query window, the answer is evidently no, but that is something neat I've never heard of before.

[Haljackey]

RHW 3.0 had to be the turning point for the franchise and really the first modern RHW release.

I think RHW 2.0 was actually the turning point (known as version 20 at the time). This version introduced the MIS, the puzzle piece drag system, smooth curves and a whole lot more.

3.0 built on all these concepts. Don't get me wrong, RHW 3.0 was fantastic, but I think 2.0 was the turning point.

In the 4.X era, I like seeing smaller releases like 4.1, 4.2, etc because it allows new features to be introduced separately and the content doesn't overwhelm users.

[Ramona Brie]

@Haljackey This should really be RHW 5.0. I've made that point already.

[GDO29Anagram]

First time I got hooked on RHW was when it was version 3. I would think the second RHevolWtion would be the introduction of ML-RHW. Though I thought the introduction of DRIs and FlexFly was revolutionary in itself. (More cowbell...)

NWM's still an infant, compared to RHW. HSR, SAM, and RAM have more or less fallen behind. TuLEPs are still a WiP... Rural Roads and CAN-AM? I dunno... But almost nothing have gone into them... GLR? It's like the first network to have a puzzle-drag override (Which is why I see "It's the same principle as GLR" for all other starter-based networks).

I think the basis for intermediate releases is more than what Ryan said; It's to make new features available already, with the prospect of expanding them someday. That's why RHW widths 8 and 10 were released in v3.0 with very few features. (Did you WANT to wait 'til 4.x for RHW widths 8 and 10 to be released, just because they can't go diagonal?)

For v4.0, it's new ramps and transitions, FLUPs, DRIs, destarterfied transition-ramps, FlexFLY, NCs, CPs, expansion of C-type networks, SPUI and DDI pieces, new overpass pieces, and rudimentary diagonalisation of the newly-named RHW-8S, as there's an 8C for it.

For 4.1, it's curved transitions, and a fix for NCs.

For 4.2 (or 5.0, if you're following Tracker), it's DDRHW and FlexSPUI (the two new WMCs), with 8S and 10S getting much needed a10Sion, and CP variety, FARHW, and diagonal functionality being expanded. Two other new features for 4.2 is RHW-3 and the new texture and path setup, which permits for a 12S and 10C to be made. (Yeah, I'm hoping for that, too.)

Similar intermediate releases would likely see more expansion for the following: Ramps and Transitions and Curves (A definite certainty), WAVERide items (FlexFLY, being one of them), DRIs (Maybe we'll get D/E ramps included), FARHW (I want to see a FARHW-8C now...), FLUPs (Can come in handy), CPs (unless Maarten already thought of them all already), more destarterfied pieces, more bridges (I hope), more DDRHW widths, ramps for DDRHWs, and more overpass pieces (I found that a few were missing from the first 4.0 release).

Features that would be absolutely new would be ML-RHW. Another one is one I suggested: The FlexTransCurve, essentially a curved transition that's the size of a FlexFly, but with the added flexibility of the FlexFly. Yet another one would be RHW widths beyond 10S and 8C.

Other features that were added are those once deemed impossible or not worth making. Key examples are DDRHW (capacity issues) and RHW-8C (it was said it would take up five tiles).

Other features are best kept secret...

One other feature would be more organisational; The current ramp nomenclature sucks, that's why a by-network organisation is being considered. It sounds more of a v5 feature, as is ML-RHW.

That's all I can think of now.

[Tarkus]

Hello Tarkus,

I watched the double decker video and noticed the part about the route query not showing any road traffic.  Have you tried seeing the output of Query.txt?  Press SHIFT + CTRL + ALT and then query tool click on a section of double-decker RHW.  On Windows, a file called Query.txt will be created in your SimCity 4 Deluxe/Apps.  In the file, there should be data under one of the Edge Density Matrices; cars should be travel type 1.  I'm predicting there will be data in the cars travel type on a non-empty section of RHW.

It does indeed show traffic in Query.txt.  Here's the entry it generated:

Code Select Expand



|-----------------------------------------------------------
| Query info for cell (11, 98) on 3/21/2172
|-----------------------------------------------------------
| Zoned: None
| Altitude: 274.1
| Land value, intrinsic: 13, total: 53 (Low)
| Slope: 0.8
| Powered: no
| Watered: yes
| Network: Rail N S Dirt Road N E
| Traffic Volume: 150   Traffic Congestion: 1
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 0 (total = 0):
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 1 (total = 230):
|   0   0   0   0       0   0   0   0
|   0   0   0 116       0   0   0 114
|   0   0   0   0       0   0   0   0
|   0 114   0   0       0 116   0   0
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 2 (total = 0):
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 3 (total = 0):
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 4 (total = 16):
|   0   0   0   0       0   0   0   0
|   0   0   0  16       0   0   0   0
|   0   0   0   0       0   0   0   0
|   0   0   0   0       0   0   0   0
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 5 (total = 0):
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 6 (total = 0):
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 7 (total = 0):
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 8 (total = 0):
| Edge Density Matrix for travel type 9 (total = 0):
|-----------------------------------------------------------


However, as jdenm8 alluded to, it's an issue with the Transit Query simply not being able to read that info.  That functionality appears to be hardcoded, unfortunately.

As far as the real "revolution", I think there's really been one each time we've had an x.0 release.  As Ganaram and Haljackey alluded to, it was the MIS and puzzle-drag that came about in 2.0, and FLEXFly and FARHW in 4.0.  Version 3.0, in addition to having the limited introduction of the Wider RHWs, added something equally valuable--Elevated RHWs, which for the first time allowed proper interchanges between two RHWs.  In the days of 2.0 when the RHW was "grounded", one still had to use workarounds, as shown in this old tutorial from that era. 

Personally, in the "revolution" category, while I feel 2.0 laid the foundation, 3.0 is where it actually started resembling something, and it became truly feasible to use the RHW for all SC4 highway needs if one so desired. 

As far as the 4.2/5.0 debate, the question basically is this: does what we have currently on the docket for this next release compare in magnitude to adding either the MIS+Puzzle-Drag, Basic Wider+Elevated RHWs, or FLEXFly+FARHW?  I'm almost wondering if it might be "poll time" again.

-Alex

[MandelSoft]

You should make a RHW-2 centered in-between 2 tiles. It would be useful for making 2-lane freeways designed for possible expansion to 4 lanes if needed. Also, a RHW-4>Centered RHW-2 transition, and a variant with 2 MIS ramps stemming from the outer lanes of the RHW-4 (like a Type-C ramp).
Also, it would make it a lot easier to build small, aesthetically pleasing interchanges where an RHW-4 diverges -one lane exiting, the other continuing to form a RHW-2 mainline.

-Gooper1

-P.S. Don't make this a necessity, though.

While it looks pleasing, often civil engineers don't design highways like this. Often they lay a RHW-2 on one side, while reserving some space on the other side. When the highway needs to be expanded, they simply lay down a stretch of road beside the existing highway, reducing traffic problems during the conversion. Same goes for re-building a RHW-4 to RHW-6, or at least here in the Netherlands.

CPs (unless Maarten already thought of them all already)

Believe me, there are more setups then I have available in the alpha build, but they are too specific (like "ONLY"-markings) or there are just no ramps setups and etc. for it. However, I do need to add some for the RHW-8C outer tiles...

Best,
Maarten

[jdenm8]

Centred RHW-2 here is uncommon, they either build on both sides with one lane built on either side of the final median, or both lanes are built together to the width of the finished road on one side like mrtnrln said.

[Wiimeiser]

With the version debate, it all depends on what the third secret weapon is. I'd leave debating until it's been revealed.

[riiga]

What would be possible though, is a NMAVE-type override for the RHW, like this:


You could widen it and make it overhaning, and it would allow for upgrading RHW-2 -> RHW-3 -> Narrow RHW-4.

[noahclem]

Nice idea riiga. I don't think it would make sense without the widening and overhanging you mentioned but a feasible way to have RHW-2 C,D, and F ramps is something that's really needed I think. And there is an RL basis for N-RHW-4 to some extent, at least in Scandinavia.

As far as the real "revolution", I think there's really been one each time we've had an x.0 release.  As Ganaram and Haljackey alluded to, it was the MIS and puzzle-drag that came about in 2.0, and FLEXFly and FARHW in 4.0. 

Don't forget orth/diag and diag/diag crossings for RHW! An especially valuable tool for RHW/RHW intersections it was a top-tier feature for me at least.

Personally, in the "revolution" category, while I feel 2.0 laid the foundation, 3.0 is where it actually started resembling something, and it became truly feasible to use the RHW for all SC4 highway needs if one so desired. 

I've always thought the same, although my first download of the NAM & RHW included 3.0 so I'm probably not a very high authority on the matter.

As far as the 4.2/5.0 debate, the question basically is this: does what we have currently on the docket for this next release compare in magnitude to adding either the MIS+Puzzle-Drag, Basic Wider+Elevated RHWs, or FLEXFly+FARHW?  I'm almost wondering if it might be "poll time" again.

-Alex

I think it would be relatively easy to make the case that the upcoming material is worthy of v. x.0 status with the flexSPUI, DDRHW, massive FARHW expansion including FA/diag pieces, all of the pieces Maarten's put together, and more. It could also be argued that many of the new features for the upcoming release build off of things that were introduced in 4.0.

Since RHW v5.0 was first publicly established as a kind of "holy grail" of RHW which would include modular, multilevel stack interchanges something like a year and a half ago now I think it makes sense to keep that target and go ahead with naming the next update 4.2. Just my two cents  

[MandelSoft]

My first RHW version was v1.2, and I didn't use it that much; I prefered MHW that time. However, I really started to use the RHW at v2.0, but still, I had a lot of MHWs. Version 3.0 extended the realm of the RHW halfway across my region Imaginia and RHW v4.0 completely banned the use of MHW. So you can see how my playing style adapted since the early RHW versions.

A NRHW-4 would only be used here for acceleration and decelleration lanes; the rest of the highway would be RHW-2.

We could name this version 5.0, since we now have:
- Lots of new FARHW pieces
- DDRHW
- Wider Elevated networks
- FlexSPUI
- Way more CPs
- Lots of more pieces for the wider RHWs.
- Draggable RHW-6S.

That's an impressive list, enough to call it a x.0 version.

Multi-level RHWs could be included in v6.0

Best,
Maarten

[Exla357]

Glad to see all this progress and I stand corrected.....

[Kitsune]

It should be called 4.5 imo.. as 5.0 has always been associated with multi-height, and with the latest innovations, we are half way there.