RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[Death50]

Cool to see people are using my interchange that's awesome. I got the newest NAM but the issue I'm having isall the level 3/4 decks aren't showing up for me, or only their supports show. Am I missing a file? I've reinstalled it 3 times.

[Tarkus]

Generally, you have to directly select the L3 and L4 networks in a custom installation.  They're not installed by the default settings.

-Alex

[Death50]

That's what get when more odd, I did that and and still the same result.

(At least I think did)

[compdude787]

Also, last night, I had an idea of making a textural override for the Type A2 Onramp.

[pic]

Who said that the textures between the offramp and the onramp had to be identical? Why else are we able to have chevrons on them?

That's awesome!! 

I've always done my RHWs such that two lane entrances result in two lanes being added, even if it's just an acceleration/merge lane that ends a few tiles later (except of course when the amt. of lanes exceeds five, since RHW-12 doesn't exist yet). This is how I've seen freeways being done in RL, so it annoys me when people don't do them right in SC4. Now people will finally do them correctly! (at least with this ramp type)

NAM 33 just keeps getting better and better!

[MandelSoft]

I just wanna point out something interesting: there tends to be a tendency for NAM developers to fulfil their own requests, and those requests tend to be made before they became NAM developers.

Reminds me of a few pieces I made possible:
- The RHW-6S and 8S Type B2 and E2 ramps. This was part of one of my very first posts.
- Another ramp type from that post, the RHW-6S Type E1 ramp was also realised  by me
- Cosmetic pieces were one of my requests and I've realised them myself.
- The Highway Re-Styling Project (not to be confused with Project Symphony) was actually based upon an idea brought up on SimTropolis, which turned out to be a photoshop-hoax. I made such a project for real. Later, I did this all over again with Symphony (with some help of my fellow NAMites).
- I wanted Euro Textures so bad for the RHW 3.0. In the end, I made them myself and I've made them for every successive version.

There were more requests by me I have realised myself, but those don't count, since I made them all after I've become part of the NAM Team.

Anyway, things are looking good, Ganaram!

Best,
Maarten

[Catalyst]

Great!

I'm really looking forward to use that elevated RHW-6c ramp, finally we'll be able to build this interchange


(close-up)


much more compact and without losing 1 tile on each side (3 instead of 5 tiles wide).

Thanks for your efforts GDO29Anagram 

[Stewey]

Great!

I'm really looking forward to use that elevated RHW-6c ramp, finally we'll be able to build this interchange


(close-up)


much more compact and without losing 1 tile on each side (3 instead of 5 tiles wide).

Thanks for your efforts GDO29Anagram 

Hi catalyst, where did you get those amazing sound-walls?

[Thomas Diamond]

Regarding the oft-asked same-direction double-decker issue: it's not going to happen, ever.  The deck jumping occurs pretty much no matter what fancy thing you do with the paths.  I've actually experimented with it extensively, and there's a GIF file I made on one page way back that shows this.  Edit: Back on Page 499.

Wow that revamped FlexFly looks nice! The concrete barriers on the FlexFly match the ones on normal EMIS much better than that of the current FlexFly Just curious, are you going to make it be at L1, L2, or both? It would be really nice to have it at both levels; then you could use two FlexFlys to do make a compact, decent-looking directional-T interchange where the intersecting freeways are wider than four lanes.

5 x 5 FlexFly at all five height levels wow ! If these could be made with as 10 X 10 or 11 by 11 then it would be possible to replicate the Dallas High Five . (the stack interchange between i- 635 and US 75  nine miles north of Downtown Dallas,TX.

The original plan had been to do it at every height the MIS has, so L0 through L4.  The model, path, and exemplar files that jondor left us--the last thing he made before he retired from SC4 modding--include everything for 90-degree FLEXFlys at all those height levels.  Whether or not we'll get through all five levels--especially with the code size matter--remains to be seen, though, but we're going to do more than just L2 for certain.

-Alex

5 x 5 FlexFly at all five height levels ! If there were a 10 x 10 or 11 x 11 versions of these, it would be possible to build sprawling 5 level stacks like those in
found in Houston .

[compdude787]

5 x 5 FlexFly at all five height levels ! If there were a 10 x 10 or 11 x 11 versions of these, it would be possible to build sprawling 5 level stacks like those in
found in Houston .

For stack interchanges, it would be better IMO to have 45-degree FlexFly pieces since that would give you more freedom to make the stack interchange whatever size you want, and 45-degree FlexFlys would have so much more use outside of just building smooth stack interchanges. But I don't think there are plans to implement a 45-degree FlexFly simply because the piece hasn't been made.

[Indiana Joe]

But I don't think there are plans to implement a 45-degree FlexFly simply because the piece hasn't been made.

It is planned, as I'm sure has been mentioned.  It's just a lot of work to make.  Wait several more NAM releases.

[APSMS]

5 x 5 FlexFly at all five height levels ! If there were a 10 x 10 or 11 x 11 versions of these, it would be possible to build sprawling 5 level stacks like those in
found in Houston .

The problem that you're not aware of is that, afaik, FlexFlys [currently] aren't cross-compatible with each other, only with other base networks. This may change in future iterations, but that is highly dependent on the override code, and I doubt too much will change regarding FlexFlyxFlexFly crossings. The advantage of smaller/FA/diagonal FlexFlys should be apparent: these have a much wider application spread and can still be adapted to things like the Dallas High Five (and so on).

And yes, the override code is fairly heavy, esp considering the current size and scope of the RHW.

[Death50]

First, are there any plans on a two lane flex fly? Is it even possible?

Secondly, I've gone through every single check box in the custom NAM setup and STILL cannot get the RHW level 3 or 4 to show, it's very frustrating. I've never had this problem with NAM before, everything else shows up even the Mod that makes the Maxis Highways RHW. I need an actual picture of what I am or not checking off. I really think I'm missing some kind of texture... the base supports will show sometimes. Please any help with this so I can star building new types of interchanges.

[roadgeek]

5 x 5 FlexFly at all five height levels ! If there were a 10 x 10 or 11 x 11 versions of these, it would be possible to build sprawling 5 level stacks like those in
found in Houston .

For stack interchanges, it would be better IMO to have 45-degree FlexFly pieces since that would give you more freedom to make the stack interchange whatever size you want, and 45-degree FlexFlys would have so much more use outside of just building smooth stack interchanges. But I don't think there are plans to implement a 45-degree FlexFly simply because the piece hasn't been made.

I brought that up earlier, and they mentioned that they need models. I am new to Blender, but I have been working on that in my spare time. I thought I would try 3DSMax until I saw the pri$e t@g. Ouch!!!!

I also don't like the fact that the current flex-fly has no pillars. I don't think that is feasible IRL, but I understand the desire to avoid the atrocious look of the pillars seen in Cities XL, where pillars get plopped in the middle of the highway. Ultimately the aim will be to base the placement of the pillar based on whether the RHW beneath the curve is a C or an S. However, if the curve is wide enough, this may not be so much of a concern.

[GDO29Anagram]

I also don't like the fact that the current flex-fly has no pillars. I don't think that is feasible IRL, but I understand the desire to avoid the atrocious look of the pillars seen in Cities XL, where pillars get plopped in the middle of the highway.

When working on the L1, L2, L3, and L4 RHW-4 D1 Outside, RHW-4 D1 Inside, RHW-6S D1 Inside, and RHW-6S D2 Outside ramps, I would just attach the pillars as a part of the models themselves, and then just stretch them when I need to make the taller versions. Can also be done with anything that's also elevated, this includes FlexHT models, and even the FlexFly models.

Finely-tuned placement can be better done using type 21 exemplars; even baked-in pillars have their limitations. Also, what did CXL do that we inadvertently avoided? Typically, a lack of pillars is a sign of aesthetic laziness, not because of something game-breaking that we wanted to avoid. Pillars aren't technically required at all; the game is perfectly fine having levitating road decks, but the pylon police will always fine us if we don't add in pillars.

[roadgeek]

And all of a sudden, we now have a new modeller: me.



Guess what this ramp is. Hint: it's an elevated RHW-6C Ramp.

I so like the Puzzle pieces as I am use to them, I avoided using the few Flex pieces as I am not sure on them.

FlexRamp development has reached a point where not only their stability now matches that of their puzzle-based counterparts, their availability now accommodates elevated ramps, and with that, over 90% of the puzzle-based ramps can safely be deactivated. Everything being developed from here on out is either Flex or draggable; no more puzzle pieces.

If all this sounds too scary, the means of using FlexRamps and will be made even more clearer and hopefully more intuitive; there will be videos on the subject clarifying on what to do, and if that ain't enough, you have the alternative of drawing out the ramps you want.

Sweet! I was wondering about thickness, it appears to be paper thin with a fold over on the rail, using some sort of extrude. I was thinking of going back to the Tutors4U youtube video to see how he made thickness for the glass bowl, but that appears to be unnecessary, correct?

[GDO29Anagram]

Sweet! I was wondering about thickness, it appears to be paper thin with a fold over on the rail, using some sort of extrude. I was thinking of going back to the Tutors4U youtube video to see how he made thickness for the glass bowl, but that appears to be unnecessary, correct?

I didn't use any of those methods. I just copied the existing models for the RHW-6C and the RHW-4 and then modified them as a whole. I don't have to generate them from scratch each time if there's already pre-existing models that I can just take from the Reader.

[roadgeek]

Indeed . . . there's some very cool stuff in the pipeline.

Indeed!  It will be so nice to use the E1 and B1 to transition to elevated diagonal MIS. I have never been a fan of the drag-able sharp curves that are currently the only way to transition, albeit I saw a post about on-slope diagonal transitions earlier, which I am equally excited about.

[InsanitysMuse]

I'm having a serious problem getting anything built with RHW - I'm trying to do a simple L2 4 lane highway going through my city, but every guide I try to follow, I can't get the off/on ramps to work at all. The guides constantly refer to MIS pieces that I can't seem to find. I've uninstalled/reinstalled to make sure I'm not missing anything, but at this point I feel like just giving up and using regular highways. If I can't get an offramp to work why bother with the mod at all? Can anyone tell me where in the menu I can select the pieces I need to hook this together?

[Blue Lightning]

Ramps button -> keep tabbing until you run into the L2 RHW-4 MIS Ramp Type A.
Then use either the MIS L2 <-> L0 height transition in the Transitions button (which is deprecated) or use a FLEX 2 level transition and a few MIS starter pieces (Starter pieces button).

You're also going to want to do some land grading, because it is going to be difficult to build an interchange on that uneven terrain. I also highly recommend you go into a test region/city and just blow through all the RHW pieces and networks and practice building interchanges before you build them in your actual cities. It'll save you a lot of frustration.

[Tarkus]

A couple of other things to note:

There is also a FLEXRamp for the Type A1 ramp interfaces under the FLEXRamps button.  It'll look like an RHW-2 ramp initially, but it'll transform into an elevated RHW-4 ramp once you drag that network through it.  Alternatively, there's also the Draggable Ramp Interfaces--this is the development preview video I did a few years ago.  Works the same today.

If you're using the MIS L0-L2 transition off the Transitions button, you'll need 6 tiles between the end of the ramp and the intersection, and 7 if you use the 2-level FLEX Height Transition (which, while taking up more space length-wise, is actually more slope tolerant and easier to use).  Those One-Way Road/Avenue intersections there aren't actually necessary, and will make your interchange larger.

Also, if you switch over to using L1 instead of L2, you can use the QuickChange pieces.  Just give yourself seven tiles of space length-wise on each side, and plop the appropriate QuickChange Partial Diamond pieces (L1 mainline, L0 ramp branch).  Then just use the RHW network tool to drag out the bottom end of the single-lane ramp branch, through the Avenue to make the intersection.  The QuickChange process is shown here.

I'd also second Blue Lightning's suggestion to do some trials and become familiar with the pieces before going into full-scale deployment.  It helps minimize the frustration to know what's available before you try using it in an actual city.  Hope that helps.

-Alex