High Speed Rail Project (HSRP)

[ScottFTL]

Thanks, Alex and Jonathan!  I learn something new every day around here.

That's great to hear that we'll be getting more draggable intersections.  It will definitely make building HSR easier.

Since you're diving back into HSRP, are there any plans for intersections with GLR?  I know there are workarounds, but I'd love to see a real HSR x GLR intersection and puzzle pieces for GLR Avenues and T-RAM.

[lorenz4]

It mentions on the the description about the texture problem that "a fix has been made for it and is waiting to be intergrated in the installer" but I didn't found any mention to where that fix can be found. Is there any way to download that fix meanwhile it is integrated in the installer?

Thanks!

[Jonathan]

Oops, thanks for pointing that out, the fix has been 'integrated into the installer' if you haven't downloaded the HSRP since the 14 of January (when the NAM before last was released) then download it again and the problem will be fixed.

And I have finished rewriting the RULs for the curves, they are much more stable now. And I've almost finished the rewriting the Orth HSRP x Orth Networks.

Jonathan

[lorenz4]

Thanks for your work!

[Fresh Prince of SC4D]

Nice work guys and happy to you back on the project. Any possibility for a raised rail x HSR station ? 

[Jonathan]

Nice work guys and happy to you back on the project. Any possibility for a raised rail x HSR station ? 

Rail x HSR? Sounds interesting, what is it?

btw, how does everyone feel about lowering the HSR track from 15.3...something m to 15m this will make a slight gap between the stations(but a fix should be very simple), and removing the blue sides from GHSR and lowering it from 1m to 0m?

Jonathan

[Fresh Prince of SC4D]

I'm game.

[Kitsune]

Yes that would be nice - I could finally convert some old train stations to HSR without any headaches.

[mightygoose]

Rail x HSR? Sounds interesting, what is it?

btw, how does everyone feel about lowering the HSR track from 15.3...something m to 15m this will make a slight gap between the stations(but a fix should be very simple), and removing the blue sides from GHSR and lowering it from 1m to 0m?

Jonathan

well at 15m there is still plenty of room for the future half height networks.. so thats fine, and i would definately prefer your revisons to the GHSR

[choco]

btw, how does everyone feel about lowering the HSR track from 15.3...something m to 15m this will make a slight gap between the stations(but a fix should be very simple), and removing the blue sides from GHSR and lowering it from 1m to 0m?

im probably the only one that would complain....   it would be nice to see the paths with the cheat on......


im updating the bridge pack anyway, so i can make the adjustments if you go forward with this.

[Kitsune]

Is there a tutorial on how to transit enable a GHSR station? I imagine I have to modify something so the trains are not floating in the air.... 

[z]

It appears that our President has been following the developments in Sim City.  From the New York Times:  Obama Unveils High-Speed Rail Plan.

[Jonathan]

Is there a tutorial on how to transit enable a GHSR station? I imagine I have to modify something so the trains are not floating in the air.... 

Kitsune, you do indeed need to modify something, very simple though. In SC4Tool Transit Enabler, set the mode to expert and then click the tiles and select modify(or equivelant) then in the Rep16 box type "0x5DC31500" (no quotes), you may need cogeo's GHSR Essentials I'm not sure though.
(That's just from memory so it may not be right, I look it up after I've posted and edit this post)

The Orth x Orth networks are complete (maxis networks only though so far) and I've added draggable GHSR x HSR and draggable Monorail x GHSR.

But what I've noticed is that many people don't think the HSRP models/textures are very lifelike, So I'm asking for someone to make a better Texture, I would my self but my texture creation skills are nill.

Only one texture is needed (there are a few others that will need to be made eventually (less than 10 I'd say)) the straight one.

Hopefully at least one person will be able to make it.

Jonathan

[choco]

by new texture, im assuming the model will be retained?

[cogeo]

@Kitsune: The HSR Essentials pack plugin isn't technically "required", but it contains some ready-made stuff, so it should make development easier. Take a look at the documentation, it explains in detail everything you may need. It contains some (lot) textures too; of course, you should select a station model with the (rail) track texture NOT modelled, otherwise it will hide the lot texture, and will still look like normal rail. The reason I released this as a separate plugin was exactly this, ie relotting of rail station BATs. There are many rail station BATs released on the STEX and LEX, and some of them (Gare du Nord, St Pancras etc) in reality offer HSR services, in addition to local/commuter (rail) and suburban (GLR) services, so ideally these should have all three kinds of track. But as the combinations are countless (eg some have 12 tracks) I didn't make such lots. The outcome would be of very little value, as the tracks' arrangement would then dictate the networks' layout, ie it would fit in very cases. Players who wish to use such stattions should rather make custom lots, fitting-in with the networks' layout of their own cities.

@Jonathan: Indeed, it's bloody time for that HSR texture to be replaced, at last. And it needn't be a high-res one (though I guess creators would prefer them - they are actually easier to make), as the result isn't really considerably better, and the additional overhead to the graphics subsystem still unknown. So it should preferably be 128x128 px, and better designed as such from the start.

Another suggestion, tracks in the (new) texture should preferably be... 2.0m apart. I know it looks stupid, and in reality this is NOT the case either, but this is how all "rails" in SC4 are made. With the current texture it's impossible to make textures for Rail<>HSR transition, or shared track (track near the stations is not HSR of-course) and junctions, simply because of this difference in gauge. As an example, in my HSR Essentials plugin I had to make dual- (rather than shared-) track textures. It looks stupid having HSR of narrower gauge than common rail.

As for GHSR, I think it would be better to remove those barriers too, and instead use some (quite taller) fencing. Currently GHSR looks like a lowered version of elevated HSR, which of course has no fecning, but instead those barriers, which are just part of the support construct.

EDIT: don't know if it's possible to use the texture(s) for GHSR as normal network textures (instead of having it combined with the model), and use a stripped version of the model in its place (ie containing only the fences, not the rail/balast texture), this would be awesome.

[gardenwong]

how about using the texture from the shinkansen mod(BTM)?

[Jonathan]

how about using the texture from the shinkansen mod(BTM)?

I thought about this, I just guess I'd prefer to have something different, because you can have the BTM and HSRP installed at the same time.

@Jonathan: Indeed, it's bloody time for that HSR texture to be replaced, at last. And it needn't be a high-res one (though I guess creators would prefer them - they are actually easier to make), as the result isn't really considerably better, and the additional overhead to the graphics subsystem still unknown. So it should preferably be 128x128 px, and better designed as such from the start.

Another suggestion, tracks in the (new) texture should preferably be... 2.0m apart. I know it looks stupid, and in reality this is NOT the case either, but this is how all "rails" in SC4 are made. With the current texture it's impossible to make textures for Rail<>HSR transition, or shared track (track near the stations is not HSR of-course) and junctions, simply because of this difference in gauge. As an example, in my HSR Essentials plugin I had to make dual- (rather than shared-) track textures. It looks stupid having HSR of narrower gauge than common rail.

As for GHSR, I think it would be better to remove those barriers too, and instead use some (quite taller) fencing. Currently GHSR looks like a lowered version of elevated HSR, which of course has no fecning, but instead those barriers, which are just part of the support construct.

Well GHSR would look like a lowered version because that's what it is , but yes it was the plan to remove the barriers originally (I think) but I ran into problems, in that the model just stopped showing up. I'd like to add the fences and things as T21s, so it is optional but I still have to get the hang of these.
Well as long as the center of the track is in the same place as the center of the old track the 2m will be fine.

EDIT: don't know if it's possible to use the texture(s) for GHSR as normal network textures (instead of having it combined with the model), and use a stripped version of the model in its place (ie containing only the fences, not the rail/balast texture), this would be awesome.

I'm not really sure what you mean, only have the sides? then what would the trains run on?

by new texture, im assuming the model will be retained?

For HSR I'm thinking yes, but GHSR the side barriers would be removed. Though if someone wants to make new models then please do

Jonathan

[gardenwong]

I think the texture of the rails of HSRP is a problem because it is too small(?)

[cogeo]

Well GHSR would look like a lowered version because that's what it is , but yes it was the plan to remove the barriers originally (I think) but I ran into problems, in that the model just stopped showing up. I'd like to add the fences and things as T21s, so it is optional but I still have to get the hang of these.

I think GHSR shouldn't be a lowered HSR version, GHSR should have tall fences, while for HSR the barriers are just fine. GHSR without fences (or barriers) wouldn't look right, in reality HSR/GHSR IS and LOOKS disruptive, its not like normal rail, actually its fenced along its entire length (so it should NOT be optional). The problem of the model not showing was probably caused by the many edits (ie after many insertions/deletions of S3D files and/or groups it was finally corrupted, i guess).

Well as long as the center of the track is in the same place as the center of the old track the 2m will be fine.

The track centres are already at +/-2.0m, so no changes in the path files are needed (I mean as far as this is concerned, you still need to change them if you want them to be lowered to ground level). I was talking about the distance between tracks ("gauge"), which is a display-only thing. The "problem" with all SC4 double-track "rails" is that the distance between the two inner tracks is... 2.0m as well, which isn't very much realistic, but I think you should do the same for HSR/GHSR too, for having the same gauge everywhere (allowing making transition/shared track textures, as I mentioned in my previous post). With some clever texturing, this (visual) effect can be at least eased; for example, the ingame rail track textures has a small "gap" (some few transparent pixels) between the two tracks.

I'm not really sure what you mean, only have the sides? then what would the trains run on?

In GHSR you display the model using a Resource Key Type X property, while most other draggable networks just use textures. What I'm talking about (I don't know if it's possible though) is a combination of the two methods. That is still use a model for the fences, displayed using RKT again (if it's a single model no T21s would be needed, I think), and textures for the track/ballast. The model should contain the fences only, and preferably the LODs should consist of two segments (one for each side), or instead be two separate groups.

Sorry for insisting so much, I just wish that HSR becomes the best it could be.

[stewart_garden]

I would heartily agree that the GHSR needs revision - it is an okay fix right now but I would really prefer to see something more realistic if possible - i.e. without the 'edges'- only rail and ballast - closer to the heavy rail texture.

The photo attached shows CTRL in the UK - my personal preference is that the GHSR more closely resemble this:



Stewart