RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

pilotdaryl · March 21, 2008, 08:39:38 AM

Lollo: The 'obstruction sign' with the yellow/black stripes on the right is backwards

all stripes must be facing the road surface (which means on the left it's northwest-southeast and on the right it's facing northeast-southwest)
Helpful?

cammo2003 · March 22, 2008, 06:56:36 AM

Quote from: Lollo on March 20, 2008, 12:55:19 PM
...And finally I got it!

Here are the ingame pics...! There's much space for improvement, but it's a beginning!

As you can see, the thing blends nicely with the slope, and there are not evident problems with its connection to the rhw network (just a slight texture difference). Plus, it is correctly TE'd to convert cars to subway. Personally I'm happy with it. Now I'll start making it more eye pleasant.

I assume you know you still need a version with a mirrored roadway (and NO WAY signs).

Still, it's looking great and will really help with interchanges.

Pat · March 22, 2008, 01:46:58 PM

WOW talk about gasping for air here Lollo that is simply wonderful how the tunnel is looking in-game...

ma360 · March 22, 2008, 02:04:03 PM

very interesting...
I like them!

freedo50 · March 22, 2008, 05:54:15 PM

I hate to be a party pooper, but I think it looks weird sticking out so much from the slope, I've not seen any RL tunnels where this is the case. Maybe you should try and get it to sink into the slope a bit more. The model is awesome though.

Fred

MandelSoft · March 23, 2008, 06:26:11 AM

Hi,

I'm requesting pieces for the RHW v21

RHW-6 -> Double RHW-4 Splitter (can be useful for Trumpet-interchanges)

Exit/Entrance Ramp style B with accelleration/decelleration line

And finally, the RHW-4 -> MIS transition piece.

I'd like to see them in v21.

Best,
MRTNRLN

Jonathan · March 23, 2008, 10:40:00 AM

The first to pictures you have shown are in V20. I don't understand?

nerdly_dood · March 23, 2008, 01:03:30 PM

The second picture you posted is not available in Version 20 but i am sure that something like that will be made for Version 21.

The first picture, however, is available as a RHW6->RHW4+\MIS transition and a RHW4->RHW6 transition.

JoeST · March 23, 2008, 01:13:14 PM

I duno, but i think he might mean the first spur goes to diagonal... I think thats what he is wanting, diagonals....

Joe

el_cozu · March 23, 2008, 02:22:29 PM

actually the first 2 are already in v 20... but... the third one is a good one... i'd like to see it also in v 21

m... there's also one piece i'd like to see... a "RHW4-MIS splitter" i'd be like the RHW2 that turns in to a pair of MIS... but instead of having them in opposite directions... it would be 2 of the same direction... so we can make easier HW staks...

also... a texture for the MIS-OWR transition...

please reply have a good sunday

------------

my mistake... the second one is not available... the one in v20 is like a style A... with a deceleration lane... sorry...

here are a couple of pics that i just made in paint XD

Haljackey · March 23, 2008, 02:36:35 PM

Actually, all three requests mrtnrln made are not included in the current version.

1. A diagonal split for the RHW-2. This would be very useful for making larger, higher-capacity interchanges where more than one lane is required for a ramp.

2. Aside from the broken accel/decel white lane marking this is included in version 20. This "touch-up" to the texture will make the entire RHW look more realistic.

3. A one way RHW-4 to MIS transition would also be very useful. Around here, the broken white lane would eliminate the right lane rather than the left, but either way it is useful.
-Also, as others have requested, a RHW-4 to MIS "Split" would be an extremely useful addition for the MIS (the two lanes split into separate 1 lane MIS pieces).

Anyways, I for one would like to see these included, along with many others. Lets give the RHW team some time and see what they can say about developing these requests.

Best,
-Haljackey

Jonathan · March 23, 2008, 02:44:51 PM

I was wrong but the first one by mrtnrln is already in the RHW.

Haljackey · March 23, 2008, 02:59:46 PM

Quote from: Warrior on March 23, 2008, 02:44:51 PM
I was wrong but the first one by mrtnrln is already in the RHW.

Where is it located? Are you mistaking it with MIS ramp "C"? A RHW-4 does diverge from the RHW-6, but not diagonally.

Think about the difference between MIS ramp "A" and "B". "A" is essentially what "C" is, but only with a RHW-4 instead of a MIS. mrtnrln is requesting a ramp similar to MIS ramp "B", except with a RHW-4 instead of a MIS.

Does that make any more sense to you Warrior? If not, I can further explain the request if you like.

Best,
-Haljackey

Jonathan · March 23, 2008, 03:03:20 PM

Sorry Haljackey, just realised I was blind lol

Toichus Maximus · March 23, 2008, 03:12:31 PM

As long as we're on the topic, are orthagonal MIS at diagonal RHW ramps possible? I ran into quite a few problems in one interchange I was making because the diagonal was too close, and had to make a pretty big lake to make it look less weird.

el_cozu · March 23, 2008, 04:13:59 PM

Quote from: Haljackey on March 23, 2008, 02:36:35 PM
Actually, all three requests mrtnrln made are not included in the current version.

1. A diagonal split for the RHW-2. This would be very useful for making larger, higher-capacity interchanges where more than one lane is required for a ramp.

2. Aside from the broken accel/decel white lane marking this is included in version 20. This "touch-up" to the texture will make the entire RHW look more realistic.

3. A one way RHW-4 to MIS transition would also be very useful. Around here, the broken white lane would eliminate the right lane rather than the left, but either way it is useful.
-Also, as others have requested, a RHW-4 to MIS "Split" would be an extremely useful addition for the MIS (the two lanes split into separate 1 lane MIS pieces).

Anyways, I for one would like to see these included, along with many others. Lets give the RHW team some time and see what they can say about developing these requests.

Best,
-Haljackey

I don't seem to understand the first one...... would it be like the one that's already in v 20?... RHW2-MIS splitter but instead of having one diagonal and one straight, we would have two diagonal in opossite directions?

Haljackey · March 23, 2008, 08:09:01 PM

Warrior: LOL! It happens to all of us! As long as you can see again...

Quote from: el_cozu on March 23, 2008, 04:13:59 PM
I don't seem to understand the first one...... would it be like the one that's already in v 20?... RHW2-MIS splitter but instead of having one diagonal and one straight, we would have two diagonal in opossite directions?

el_cozu: Take a moment to read my response to Warrior's post on a similar matter.

Essentially, what's the difference between MIS ramp "A" and "B"? A is orthogonal, B is diagonal.

MIS ramp "C" is essentially the same as MIS ramp "A" because it is orthogonal as well. The only difference is "A" being for the MIS and "C" for being the RHW-4.

What mrtnrln is requesting is basically MIS ramp "B" for the RHW-4, a split that is diagonal, not orthogonal.
-Call it MIS ramp "D" if you will. It is not the same as MIS ramp "C".

I hope that cleared it up a bit for you. If you're still stuck, I can provide some visuals or something if need be.

Best,
-Haljackey

MandelSoft · March 24, 2008, 04:42:22 AM

Wow! 11 replies in less than one day

! It starts to look like that it's a really good idea.

To answer all questions about the pics: All those pieces are not included in v20. Some look like they are in v20, but they are not.
Also I think a RHW-4 -> MIS splitter is a good idea

Best,
MRTNRLN

Starmanw402007 · March 24, 2008, 07:30:03 AM

The only problem I have with the RHW and MIS is when I go to build over avenue. I'm unable to extend over the avene. Why is that?

nerdly_dood · March 25, 2008, 02:56:14 PM

RHW/MIS is a work in progress. Unless you want to use elevated puzle pieces or a stretch of avenue you cannot have a good-looking intersection with rhw v.20 YET!! Just wait for v.21 to come out and i am sure a lot of problems will have been fixed. (But that might take a while because the NAM team is concentrating on their TLA project (turning-lane avenues - it is in another sticky thread in this category))