• Welcome to SC4 Devotion Forum Archives.

NAM: Development

Started by memo, April 29, 2007, 06:33:33 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Quote from: Fledder200 on May 18, 2007, 06:22:35 PM
Draggable.....GLR...need....to....Breath....Draggable....Draggable...GLR....need....to...have...Draggable GLR!!!

Actually, Fledder, when I first saw the draggable GLR, you and Liaane were the first thing I thought of!


The draggable GLR looks great! Although will it still crash the game?


Also need the draggable GLR! Would be a nice addition!


Quote from: mapper on May 18, 2007, 05:18:46 PM
I hope this isn't too much to ask, but can you show us what the diagonal elevated heavy rail looks like?

As far as I know, Swamper77 is still working on the diagonal elevated heavy rails, so I don't know if there are screenshots already.

Quote from: Zaphod on May 18, 2007, 05:44:08 PM
just curious, can you do the same thing with the "rural variety" without a sidewalk? I and im sure many others use GLR to put our el rail lines on the ground out in the suburbs where a continous elevated structure isnt entirely necessary.

Yes, there's also a rural variety available. :)

Quote from: cameron1991 on May 18, 2007, 09:30:13 PM
The draggable GLR looks great! Although will it still crash the game?

We won't be able to fix the crash issue, but since you use the normal el-rail tool for dragging GLR, the game is much less prone to crashes than before. However, you will have to use "starter puzzle pieces" to start a draggable el-rail stretch, and those are still "dangerous". Also, you will have to use puzzle pieces for special intersections, such as el-rail x GLR, because the GLR would convert to el-rail (or the other way round) if you cross those - remember, GLR is still nothing else than el-rail on the ground.

But all in all, it'll be much easier to use; I was able to replace an entire GLR puzzle piece network of a city (which took me several hours to build) in less than 15 minutes with draggable GLR.


This is all great news.  I just spent about two hours last night making a glr network in one of my cities.  This next NAM will be great!!
The bridge pieces look incredible as well
I can't wait.

Robin   :thumbsup: &apls
Call me Robin, please.


Quote from: Andreas on May 19, 2007, 06:50:48 AM
I was able to replace an entire GLR puzzle piece network of a city (which took me several hours to build) in less than 15 minutes with draggable GLR.

That brings me to a question I had about the new draggable version. Will we have to bulldoze all our plopped GLR puzzle pieces before installing the new NAM, or will they be compatible side-by-side?
Have you ever had the Prop Pox? Join us to help find a vaccine or a cure.

Totuna e dac-ai murit flăcău ori moş îngârbovit;
Dar nu-i totuna leu să mori ori câine-nlănţuit.


They are compatible side-by-side. I can vouch for that since I have the Developer's copy ;)

You can call me Jan, if you want to.
Pagan and Proud!


Yes, all existing puzzle pieces are still in place. For some setups, you will still need them anyway (such as el-rail over GLR, and of course the starter puzzle pieces), and even if draggable GLR is much easier to use, I assume not everyone wants to tear down his entire GLR network and replace everything after installing the next NAM. ;) The same goes for the GLR stations - they will have to be updated for the draggable version, but this can be done by installing a simple patch. And the good news is that you don't need to bulldoze the ones that have been built already as well.


Good news all around - thanks! :thumbsup:
Have you ever had the Prop Pox? Join us to help find a vaccine or a cure.

Totuna e dac-ai murit flăcău ori moş îngârbovit;
Dar nu-i totuna leu să mori ori câine-nlănţuit.


diagonal elevated railpieces!! just heard that they will be in the next NAM, even with transition to the pieces that are already in the NAM!!
hoping the release is even sooner than i dare to expect!
Men's imagination is exceeding his capabilities, that's why men is still dreaming.


The chat at ST is a wonderous place... (will edit later)
(Under Construction)


Quote from: Masochist on June 01, 2007, 02:27:24 PM
The chat at ST is a wonderous place... (will edit later)

it makes my eyes bleed  :D :D :D
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it


Could someone please reply this:
"What's the capacity (and anticipated traffic) of the new Avenue/GLR dual network"?

This is needed for making roadtop stations for these networks. Here is my thread on ST. Roadtop stations count the through traffic as "usage", so the total capacity must be greater than the "target capacity" by the anticipated through traffic, so as to offset the through traffic. The result is not perfect, it's just an approximation, but there's no other way.

Capacity must be such that the stations must not be clogged (due to the through traffic) thus degrading quality of service before the network is congested. On the other hand it must not be too high, because the station will feature excess capacity, not on par with the Maxis standards. I have used this technique in the current RTMT version, getting satisfactory results.

But I need to know the exact capacities to make the same for these networks. It may be easy to say that it's the sum of Avenue + GLR capacities, or the maximum, but I would like to be sure. Several tests I made have not lead to conclusions, only to hypotheses, eg that the congestion dataview shows only the congestion of the avenue component (not the GLR). Road traffic appears to affect the (reported) congestion much more than GLR traffic. Furthermore I don't know if congestion is calculated separately for the avenue and the GLR part or if they somehow interfere. Another problem is that for "double" networks, like avenues, congestion is (definitely) calculated separately for each direction, but what about these specific type of networks? As defined in NAM, each direction contains an avenue branch plus a GLR track. But GLR truck is actually a "mono" network (though it has two tracks) ie congestion is calculated once (so does capacity). So should I add the GLR capacity twice to the station's capacity?

Looking forward to your replies.


Not sure where to ask the question, but there's a particular type of interchange/ramp system that I've seen many times in real life that doesn't exist in the game yet, and would be quite useful for certain applications. (Namely, as in real life, when adding a highway to an existing city as a "bypass" route.)

What I've seen is an avenue and a highway running at 45 degree angle to each other, but instead of crossing where they meet, they merge. The avenue to highway only has two ramps (not the full four; you can't turn backward) and then the combined highway contines away from the junction, sometimes "straight" from the highway side but more often "straight" from the avenue.

The advantage I can see here too is that it would be the only (or first) way to put ramps on a curved section of highway (using the straight-from-avenue configuration). (And, the highway can be used to route long-range traffic around a congested city center which the avenue serves, then this could be used again to reconnect on the other side.)

Basically, I'm wondering if anyone with the skill to do so is interested in making this....


cogeo: Unfortunately I don't know the actual capacity of the Avenue/GLR puzzle pieces. I just do know that each of these puzzle pieces consist of an intersection of Avenue and Lightrail. Thus I suppose that the capacity of the station should be greater than twice the capacity of Avenues plus once or twice the capacity of Lightrails. It appears to me that you had the same thoughts, so I can't really help you. Hopefully, further tests of you will be successful.


memo, thanks for your reply. Some further tests I made have shown that the Avenue/GLR do not really suffer from congestion, they need to have a failly high usage of both road + GLR traffic, to reach the same congestion levels as avenues (with road traffic alone). So this pretty much suggests that capacities should rather be avenue plus GLR capacity. I've settled with the capacities for my stations, I think they would be OK (though capacities will be seemingly high). The only problem with Avenue/GLR puzzle pieces (concerning capacities) is with the Avenue/GLRxRoad intersections, they look deeply red in the traffic dataview, but this may actually be a graphical-only issue.


Would this type of intersection ever be possible in NAM (the second image down) ?


@Packerfan386  Yes, it is possible.  In the next version of NAM this will be possible for AVE/AVE intersections.  The way to draw it is by creating an AVE/AVE 4way intersection and then in one of the 4 corners you will need to draw a OWR in a 90 turn fashion around the corner.  I dont have a picture handy but I posted one in the Show Us Your.... Interchanges.
"You learn something new everyday."

Bringing the new horizons closer to reality.

Berethor ♦ beskhu3epnm ♦ blade2k5 ♦ dmscopio jplumbley ♦ moganite ♦ M4346 ♦ Dedgren ♦ Ennedi Shadow Assassin ♦  Tarkus ♦ wouanagaine
Street Addon Mod - SAM


Thanks for the reply :)...BTW  what is "OWR"?
Sorry but I have to know if this too will be possible in NAM/ RHW (never mind the signs)? ;)