NWM (Network Widening Mod) - Development and Support

[jondor]

By the way, the second instance does not involve a TLA-3, it involves a Road with TuLEPs ending at a street.

Try clicking your way down the street in google maps.  I've driven down that part of Century.  It's a TLA-3.

[gooper1]

Try clicking your way down the street in google maps.  I've driven down that part of Century.  It's a TLA-3.

Tried that. At that intersection (at least), it's a Road with TuLEPs.

[Tarkus]

Tried that. At that intersection (at least), it's a Road with TuLEPs.

The Road TuLEPs are designed to also be used as TLA-3 TuLEPs . . . and AVE-2 TuLEPs and ARD-3 TuLEPs--just a different transition gets used.

-Alex

[GDO29Anagram]

The Road TuLEPs are designed to also be used as TLA-3 TuLEPs . . . [J]ust a different transition gets used.

@gooper1: Also, those pieces are at the end of the TuLEP tab ring, just so you know.

By the way, the second instance does not involve a TLA-3, it involves a Road with TuLEPs ending at a street.

I've been thinking about that today...

ARD-3, anybody?


_{(Still lacks stop points and T21s. The paths still need to be perfected... This is something I've been experimenting with last weekend.)}

The ARD-3, as I have it set up here, could be used to mimic a turn-lane interface. Not unless a street-interfacing SIP gets made first...

[jondor]

Tried that. At that intersection (at least), it's a Road with TuLEPs.

Also notice that Century IS in fact 3 lanes all the way down.  Admittedly with an extra long gap where the turn lane starts.

In any case, it's a silly argument. There's no need to complain about one little texture that personally rubs you the wrong way.  Just don't use it.

I've been thinking about that today...

ARD-3, anybody?

Looking good! 

[j-dub]

(Still lacks stop points and T21s. The paths still need to be perfected... This is something I've been experimenting with last weekend.)

Well which way would the stop signs face in this setup? Road stopping for street or street stopping for road, or just use an all-way stop?

I have no preference, but I was just wondering since stop signs on 3 lane SC4 roads are virtually non-existant, except when you take a TLA-3 and make a junction with an RHW-2, the RHW has the right away, and the only time I noticed where roads have stop signs instead of signals, which does give a good alternative for realism.

[Ramona Brie]

Well which way would the stop signs face in this setup? Road stopping for street or street stopping for road, or just use an all-way stop?

I have no preference, but I was just wondering since stop signs on 3 lane SC4 roads are virtually non-existant, except when you take a TLA-3 and make a junction with an RHW-2, the RHW has the right away, and the only time I noticed where roads have stop signs instead of signals, which does give a good alternative for realism.

I think an all-way stop is needed.

[Tarkus]

Ganaram, fine work here--those paths look excellent.

Well which way would the stop signs face in this setup? Road stopping for street or street stopping for road, or just use an all-way stop?

I have no preference, but I was just wondering since stop signs on 3 lane SC4 roads are virtually non-existant, except when you take a TLA-3 and make a junction with an RHW-2, the RHW has the right away, and the only time I noticed where roads have stop signs instead of signals, which does give a good alternative for realism.

I think an all-way stop is needed.

In the two examples I linked, the first from Albany, OR, gives the TLA-3 the right of way while the Street has to stop.  The second example from Hillsboro, OR has an all-way stop.  I'd probably go with the all-way stop.

-Alex

[Ramona Brie]

Will such an intersection be included for NMAVE-4, now that I think of it?

[gooper1]

Ganaram, fine work here--those paths look excellent.

In the two examples I linked, the first from Albany, OR, gives the TLA-3 the right of way while the Street has to stop.  The second example from Hillsboro, OR has an all-way stop.  I'd probably go with the all-way stop.

-Alex

I think the TLA-3 should have the right-of-way, it has more capacity than a street.

[riiga]

I think the TLA-3 should have the right-of-way, it has more capacity than a street.

I think not, since it's a general rule that the through-road in a T-intersection has right-of-way.

[MandelSoft]

^^ At least, that's the case in Europe. But then again, TLA's are rarely/never used in Europe...

[Ramona Brie]

I think not, since it's a general rule that the through-road in a T-intersection has right-of-way.

That would apply if TLA-3s weren't designed for higher capacity applications (relatively), which I would think merit a stop on the through-street in addition to the obvious stop needed on the ending road.

AVE-2 I can see the through road having the right of way. ARD-3 and TLA-3 (and definitely NMAVE-4) don't work that way.

[gooper1]

AVE-2 I can see the through road having the right of way. ARD-3 and TLA-3 (and definitely NMAVE-4) don't work that way.
[/quote]
I agree, since an AVE-2 is just a road with a large median and therefore should be treated (in this respect (and in many others)) like a normal road.

[jdenm8]

ARD-3 and TLA-3 are nothing more than roads with another lane.

The central lane in TLA-3 could probably be ignored, as it does not carry through traffic, nor add any capacity. ARD-3 is different, though it is still ending, and ending roads give way to through roads in most applications.

[gooper1]

ARD-3 and TLA-3 are nothing more than roads with another lane.

The central lane in TLA-3 could probably be ignored, as it does not carry through traffic, nor add any capacity. ARD-3 is different, though it is still ending, and ending roads give way to through roads in most applications.

If you remember the talk about TLA-3 bridges some pages back, I complained about the uselessness of the middle buffer zone (you can't turn on a bridge!) and requested for it to be turned into and ARD-3 bridge, where the central buffer strip could actually be put to use (as a lane of traffic).

[Blue Lightning]

We can easily have a TLA-3/AVE-2 bridge and an ARD-3 bridge coexist. Again, the only point of having a TLA-3/AVE-2 bridge is simply for consistency (don't always have room to put transition pieces at both ends) and for RL points (plenty of bridges have "solid medians" on roads that have medians IRL)

[Tarkus]

BL summed up my thoughts pretty well.

Of course, it's kind of a moot point, as I don't anticipate that we're going to have bridges as part of this next NWM release.

-Alex

[GDO29Anagram]

If you remember the talk about TLA-3 bridges some pages back, I complained about the uselessness of the middle buffer zone (you can't turn on a bridge!) and requested for it to be turned into and ARD-3 bridge, where the central buffer strip could actually be put to use (as a lane of traffic).

You do realise that the bridge setup BL had in mind was one that would be compatible for BOTH TLA-3 AND AVE-2; They would lack the turn lane paths anyway.

And Tarkus and Blue Lightning: Holy jeez, you two just posted what I was going to say at the same time (Minus the consistency bit); What are the odds?

[MandelSoft]

Expanding the NWM-realm to CitiesXL 2011 





Yes, that's right, a AVE-2 and ARD-3 for CitiesXL 2011! The game already has a AVE-4, MAVE-4, MAVE-5, MAVE-6, OWR-2, OWR-4 and OWR-5, but not these two. I'm also planning to create a OWR-3 for this game. And another thing: the standard RD-2 and AVE-4 in CitiesXL 2011 don't have markings at all (what!?). Fortunatly, I've fixed that issue too.

This is one thing I do when I'm not busy with modding SC4 

Best,
Maarten