RHW (RealHighway) - Development and Support

[Tarkus]

An elevated version:



Right now, they're RHW-2-based on the mainline, mostly to allow some flexibility in terms of what overrides can go through, and currently are using Type A1 ramps (though since they're FLEX, a D1 could be placed over top).  I'm still trying to determine the best balance between flexibility, ease-of-use, and realism, however.  In case anyone's wondering about wider RHWs, or the common setup where a two-tile RHW (i.e. RHW-4) has a one-tile median, that's covered, too:



If you have your RHW stretch built before hand, since all four of these setups are included on the same RotationRing (and are cycled through with Home/End), in many cases, the game can look at the RULs, and select the correct variant for the RHW network you're using, while you're hovering the interchange over it.

The official name for these full interchange items is QuickChange Xpress, or QCX–a rather unique acronym, as it includes both a Q and an X (and indirectly pays tribute to Q and X enthusiast and RHW project founder qurlix).

-Alex

[APSMS]

You know, just for fun, we should call them QuickChange Xpress pieces (acronym/initialism QLX) to directly honor Qurlix and make people wonder where the heck we got the L from. And to mess with new users.

[Tarkus]

That would really mess with people. 

In any case, here's the Avenue version.



I'm still debating about whether to go for D1 ramps in at least a couple of spots (namely, the entrances) in place of the A1 ramps, though even in the present form, it's possible to plop a D1 FLEXRamp right over the A1 setup in the QCX.  There's also one other thing I'm considering, which I can't quite talk about yet, as it pertains to future functionality.

-Alex

[Gugu3]

This is getting really interesting Alex!

[roadgeek]

That would really mess with people. 

In any case, here's the Avenue version.



I'm still debating about whether to go for D1 ramps in at least a couple of spots (namely, the entrances) in place of the A1 ramps, though even in the present form, it's possible to plop a D1 FLEXRamp right over the A1 setup in the QCX.  There's also one other thing I'm considering, which I can't quite talk about yet, as it pertains to future functionality.

-Alex

D1 would be totally awesome! Quite useful when creating Auxiliary lanes.

[mgb204]

I think personally having them support D1 as a flex-override might be a better solution than adding D1 alternatives for each piece. My rationale being mainly that it helps encourage users to get used to how these overrides work for RHW in general. At the same time, it keeps things simpler in terms of the number of options presented to users. Since the whole idea of breaking one of our cardinal rules, is to help make RHW simpler, in an attempt to encourage it's adoption.

[wallasey]

Those interchanges are looking great! Chance to create some really tight junctions! Great work!

[Allein]

That would really mess with people. 

In any case, here's the Avenue version.

https://simtarkus.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/rhw-07142016-1.jpg

I'm still debating about whether to go for D1 ramps in at least a couple of spots (namely, the entrances) in place of the A1 ramps, though even in the present form, it's possible to plop a D1 FLEXRamp right over the A1 setup in the QCX.  There's also one other thing I'm considering, which I can't quite talk about yet, as it pertains to future functionality.

-Alex

Will that be possible with L1 RHW and L2 avenue too ?

For the moment it doesn't work for me:

[Tarkus]

Having just attempted to plug in an L1 RHW-4 mainline on the L0 RHW/L1 Avenue QCX, it looks like pretty much every component in the interchange would require a good chunk of adjacency stability override code to accomplish the conversion to L1 RHW/L2 Avenue.  It's not a particularly common setup, and accordingly, one that ordinarily wouldn't be a high priority, though now that the challenge is there (), I'm kind of curious to take a look at it.

In your non-QCX setup you've built, it looks like the main problems are there actually isn't a reference exemplar for the L2 Avenue x L2 MIS intersection (0x57221320), and likely, a lack of adjacency stability to handle L2 Avenue x L2 MIS next to L2 Avenue-over-L1 RHW-4.

Edit (40 minutes later): Still need to add a little more stability with to make the adjacent L1 RHW-4s always play nice, but here's your basic setup realized.  Still a lot more I'd need to do to handle a QCX like this, however.



-Alex

[APSMS]

If that interchange setup is merely supported going forward, I'll be happy. No need to kill yourself trying to make a QCX piece for it, esp. since it's a more specialized setup.

[Tarkus]

On the QCX side, I'm actually just trying to get the overrides in place such that the L0 RHW/L1 Avenue setup can be converted into an L1 RHW/L2 Avenue setup by virtue of plugging an L1 RHW into the L0 RHW end.  It's being rather . . . uncooperative . . . but I'm getting closer to kicking its posterior.  Some of the stuff I'm having to do for it should improve other aspects of RHW FLEX-HT and Avenue Viaduct functionality, so there's some very beneficial side effects that can come from it.

Edit: It's still rather fragile.  The fact that there's L1 AVE Viaduct starters on the ends really does a fair bit to interfere with the L2 AVE support.  I have some . . . ideas . . . however.



-Alex

[Gugu3]

Wow!Great stuff!

[JoeST]

noiiiiiiice you're blowing us all away once again Alex daaaaang

[dyoungyn]

I agree, looks very promising and hopeful.  However, the one "Pre-Fab piece that has always been wanted is a "T" interchange at L2, like the one that has already been created for Maxis Highway Override (MHO).  Was really hoping for one that connects to RHW 6S L2 instead of 4S MHO.

[Tarkus]

FLEXing some RUL muscles, making some more static puzzle pieces redundant . . .



-Alex

[Vizoria]

Just wanna say Tarkus- brilliant work with the prefab interchanges both RHW and Project Symphony. These will save a lot of time when interchange building in this game.

[Gugu3]

That's incredible Alex!

[Tarkus]

Thanks, everyone!   To add to a couple of points:

I agree, looks very promising and hopeful.  However, the one "Pre-Fab piece that has always been wanted is a "T" interchange at L2, like the one that has already been created for Maxis Highway Override (MHO).  Was really hoping for one that connects to RHW 6S L2 instead of 4S MHO.

There's still a fair bit of work to do before T-interchange QCXs become reality.  Everything QCX is FLEX-based (which actually gets around the oft-mentioned 16x16 limit on puzzle pieces), and in order to do something similar to the MHO T-int, with the same degree of compactness, it'd likely require FLEXFly-over-FLEXFly.  We'll have to look further at the possible options to see what the best footprint/arrangement would be.

brilliant work with the prefab interchanges both RHW and Project Symphony.

Actually, everything shown here so far with the QCX prototypes is RHW-based.  QCX pieces require a FLEX-based approach, and Project Symphony isn't set up for FLEX.  The one QCX that may have looked like Project Symphony is actually an L1 RHW-4/L2 Avenue setup. 

As far as new developments go, the RHW-6C-to-4 transition showed in my last post is merely the base form of this new FLEX piece, which, when hooking an RHW-10S into the S-side of the transition, turns the whole thing into a brand new RHW-10S-to-8C transition.  Still some cosmetic things to sort, of course (the overhang "bite" being the most obvious), and pathing, but this should give you the basic idea.



Overall, this piece will support the following setups:

• RHW-6C-to-4
• RHW-6C-to-6S
• RHW-6C-to-8S
• RHW-8C-to-6S
• RHW-8C-to-8S
• RHW-8C-to-10S

Once elevated forms of these transitions are created, the plan is to use the same FLEX piece to support those as well.  This piece is, as you might guess, a type of FLEX Width Transition, or FLEX-WT.

-Alex

[APSMS]

I would add that while compact T-interchanges are a nice thought, the notion of compact with anything bigger than RHW-4 is going to be misleading, and while I would love FLEX-Fly over FLEX-Fly support, IIRC the amount of code to support such a situation is ridiculous for the payout (unless something has dramatically changed in the implementation of FFs, which could be the case).

For the most part we are probably better off either making our own or using the PS RHW-4 one instead (where applicable).

Really liking how the transitions seem to be progressing Alex. I've not been using RHW that much lately, but I think I'll need to figure out a way to fit it in given all the work that's been made over the last few dev cycles. Any chance the RHW-6C to 6S symmetrical transition will get FLEXed, or is that likely to stay a PP given it's specificity?

[Seaman]

wonderful! I love to see the FLEX project shaping up.
The announcment of the QCX (or QLX regarding to APSMS's mad idea) and upcoming FLEX-WT reminds me to ask, whether there is something like a list of acronyms/register people can use to translate. I think this could be pretty useful in respect to the tons of acronyms the NAM has already produced. I asume I am not the first to think about that, so has anybody done it already?
A search in the SC4 Wiki found things like FLEX and RHW, but ERHW, DRI, FTL or QCX were negative. Anyway, a simple list with short explanations, maybe as a sticky thread, might be useful?

(in case none exists, I think I could start to work on that)