Sim City 4 Devotion Forums

SimCity 4 Devotion Custom Content Showcase => Network Addon Mod (NAM) => NAM Inactive threads => Topic started by: The NAM Team on July 29, 2015, 11:56:15 PM

Title: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: The NAM Team on July 29, 2015, 11:56:15 PM
This thread is intended for general support purposes pertaining to the NAM 33 Pre-Release.

As the NAM 33 Pre-Release has been superseded by the official release of NAM 33 as of 26 November 2015, this thread has been locked and remains in place as an archive.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Schohns on July 30, 2015, 11:01:42 AM
Orthogonal crossings of two rail lines seem not to work:
(http://i.imgur.com/BqmJwXp.jpg)
To be honest, I don't know if this is new. Haven't tried it before.

But thank you very much for the new FLEXFLYs and new smooth curves. Love those already :thumbsup: The same goes for the disconnector.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Abrams124 on July 30, 2015, 12:39:04 PM
Wohooo!I'was waiting for this!Im a big fan of nam!!
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on July 30, 2015, 01:00:02 PM
I'll be posting teaser videos that outline new content and any changes throughout the next several days. Note: there are ten videos in total.

For those who have missed it, here are the first two.

Rampage I (Roman numeral 1).

http://www.youtube.com/v/b2PeDUDlwvw
Disco.

http://www.youtube.com/v/8xPc4f5WceE
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Abrams124 on July 30, 2015, 01:04:31 PM
Already saw the first,but the second is....REVOLUTIONARY!
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on July 30, 2015, 01:21:27 PM
A note about the Disconnector and the FlexFly: the Disconnector will currently not work with eating the FlexFly. This is due to how there are more dirtroad-to-network combinations (nine) than there are allowable rotations in the starters tab rings (eight), so the network combination required to eat the FlexFly (Dirtroad and Ground Highway) is simply not there. The long-term solution is to put the Disconnector in its own button so it won't have this mismatch problem, but for now, you won't accidentally eat the FlexFlys.


The same problem exists with starters based off of Elevated Highway, so certain starters can't be eaten either.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: omgitskosc on July 30, 2015, 03:19:34 PM
90 degree MRC for RHW-6S seems to be missing a piece.

(http://i.imgur.com/oc9FNFv.jpg)

Gotta say NAM 33 is a total smoothness overdose. Also first post!  ;D
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on July 30, 2015, 03:38:34 PM
Ahh.

Despite saying it supports RHW 6S that Blend tile doesn't.

You have to use 2 45 deg half's.

There is no model for that at this current time! So that's why it does not work!

I would consider that to be a feature that may not be implemented.

I felt that it would be a bit sharp for 3 Lanes anyway!

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: lifein2x3 on July 30, 2015, 05:21:28 PM
I seem to be having this problem with the basic draggable ramps.

(http://i.imgur.com/AqYEohah.jpg)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: simonvangenderen on July 30, 2015, 06:11:32 PM
Do you mean the ploppable FlexRamps? In that case, I've been having the same problem, on every single one...
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on July 30, 2015, 06:19:19 PM
Looks like I'll have to prematurely publish teaservid #7, because it explains what's going on here.

http://www.youtube.com/v/uvxFrKI9lCs
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on July 30, 2015, 06:47:37 PM
So it seems that the Ontario texture set has the same problems as the Euro textures do. We will have to use the default RHW textures for now. That's fine; it won't detract much from the awesomeness of NAM 33.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: lifein2x3 on July 30, 2015, 06:59:57 PM
I'm glad it's a relatively minor fix. Thanks for posting the video, that cleared up a lot!
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on July 31, 2015, 02:50:49 AM
DTR Y-splitter is missing paths. LHD, using RRW.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Abrams124 on July 31, 2015, 03:32:35 AM
Well i will still use the ontario because the important parts aren't buggy :D but hey theese will be fixed soon,nam is in good hands
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on July 31, 2015, 05:19:38 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/pzO99sn.png)
How is this happening?


(http://i.imgur.com/3jCkbwp.png)
Currently it is physically impossible to recreate these obsolete pieces with DRIs or Flex Ramps. I have exhausted every possibility here.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Abrams124 on July 31, 2015, 11:29:29 AM
Haha just figured out the secret feature!It's awsum
now it's locked in my brain from the outside world
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on July 31, 2015, 02:41:52 PM
Currently it is physically impossible to recreate these obsolete pieces with DRIs or Flex Ramps. I have exhausted every possibility here.

The 6S A2 ramp's specs were changed for NAM 33.  In order to give smoother geometry, and be more similar to the 8C and 10S A2 ramps (which can now be built by overriding it), we lengthened it to 4 tiles in length.  The 3-tile one is deprecated.

As far as the 8S one, it's been redesigned to better match the new 6S version, and so one of its tiles on the mainline has actually been removed.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on July 31, 2015, 02:59:33 PM
The 6S A2 ramp's specs were changed for NAM 33.  In order to give smoother geometry, and be more similar to the 8C and 10S A2 ramps (which can now be built by overriding it), we lengthened it to 4 tiles in length.

Alex, I think there's INRUL interference that's causing the 6S A2 FlexRamp to destabilise. It could be this section in INRUL13 (see below) or some weird loading order issue in INRUL14. Exotic patterns in INRUL14 don't necessarily need corresponding patterns in INRUL13, right?

Code: [Select]
;NOTE: IF ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ARE FOUND, COMMENT OUT THIS SECTION

;Additional Basic INRULs for intergration of Flexcurve Flex Pieces
;
;Corner with Median Flag
;
1,2,0,0,4
3,0,0x57000800,1,0
;
1,4,2,0,0
3,0,0x57000800,2,0
;
1,0,4,2,0
3,0,0x57000800,3,0
;
1,0,0,4,2
3,0,0x57000800,0,0
;
1,0,0,2,4
3,0,0x57000800,1,1
;
1,0,2,4,0
3,0,0x57000800,2,1
;
1,2,4,0,0
3,0,0x57000800,3,1
;
1,4,0,0,2
3,0,0x57000800,0,1
;
;Corner with Double Median Flag
;
1,4,0,0,4
3,0,0x57000800,1,0
;
1,4,4,0,0
3,0,0x57000800,2,0
;
1,0,4,4,0
3,0,0x57000800,3,0
;
1,0,0,4,4
3,0,0x57000800,0,0
;
;Diag to Median INRUL Test
;
1,0,0,4,3
3,0,0x57000200,0,0
;
1,3,0,0,4
3,0,0x57000200,1,0
;
1,4,3,0,0
3,0,0x57000200,2,0
;
1,0,4,3,0
3,0,0x57000200,3,0
;
1,4,0,0,1
3,0,0x57000200,1,0
;
1,0,0,1,4
3,0,0x57000200,0,0
;
1,0,1,4,0
3,0,0x57000200,3,0
;
1,1,4,0,0
3,0,0x57000200,2,0
;
;Median on corner
;
1,2,4,0,2
3,0,0x57000000,0,0
;
1,2,2,4,0
3,0,0x57000000,1,0
;
1,0,2,2,4
3,0,0x57000000,2,0
;
1,4,0,2,2
3,0,0x57000000,3,0
;
1,0,4,2,2
3,0,0x57000000,0,1
;
1,4,2,2,0
3,0,0x57000000,1,1
;
1,2,2,0,4
3,0,0x57000000,2,1
;
1,2,0,4,2
3,0,0x57000000,3,1
;
;Stright on median corner
;
1,4,2,0,4
3,0,0x57000000,0,0
;
1,4,4,2,0
3,0,0x57000000,1,0
;
1,0,4,4,2
3,0,0x57000000,2,0
;
1,2,0,4,4
3,0,0x57000000,3,0
;
1,0,2,4,4
3,0,0x57000000,0,1
;
1,2,4,4,0
3,0,0x57000000,1,1
;
1,4,4,0,2
3,0,0x57000000,2,1
;
1,4,0,2,4
3,0,0x57000000,3,1
;
;Straight with median
;
1,4,2,0,2
3,0,0x57000000,0,0
;
1,2,4,2,0
3,0,0x57000000,1,0
;
1,0,2,4,2
3,0,0x57000000,2,0
;
1,2,0,2,4
3,0,0x57000000,3,0
;

EDIT: I found out. Commenting out the code above fixes the issues as described, but with no other adverse effects to anything else or any other new content.

-----

On that note, I'm returning now to the intended video schedule. This is supposed to be the third video in the series.

http://www.youtube.com/v/EKOclR8lMOY
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on July 31, 2015, 06:41:25 PM
Thanks for the follow-up on that, Ganaram.  I'll take a look once it stops being a blast furnace upstairs and I can get on my desktop with all my SC4 stuff (it's the third straight 100F-plus day here).

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on July 31, 2015, 08:11:52 PM
So, what's the layout for the 8S - RHW-4 splitter? Because I just can't figure it out.

Also, as mentioned previously, the DTR Y-splitter lacks LHD paths. Surprisingly, aside from the ramp piece metioned above, it's the only thing in my game that's functionally broken (though numerous ramps have texture bugs... I'll have to compile them I guess...)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: tomvsotis on July 31, 2015, 08:14:44 PM
Damn, this is ... exciting! I can't wait for the Mac version :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: woodb3kmaster on July 31, 2015, 08:44:42 PM
So, what's the layout for the 8S - RHW-4 splitter? Because I just can't figure it out.

That ramp (which is now called the 8S D2 ramp) uses the pattern on the right side of the third row below (labeled "D2 Out"), with all of the arrows shown:

(http://i887.photobucket.com/albums/ac72/GDO29Anagram/capture_x1_x2dri.png)

Ganaram modified my original version of this diagram to show 8S-specific pattern pieces with the blue arrows, and recolored the arrows needed for the X2 ramp types in red.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on July 31, 2015, 09:42:48 PM
Also, as mentioned previously, the DTR Y-splitter lacks LHD paths.

I'll take a look at that one, should be able to resolve it for the final release.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 01, 2015, 05:57:09 PM
I believe I can FlexFly.

http://www.youtube.com/v/mlBVa_-TxLY

Fun fact: prior estimates put the required amount of code needed for all FlexFlys at about a million lines of code. Currently, it's 100000 for all FlexFlys, all the way to L4. In comparison, the old FlexFlys, all four of them, needed a total of about 50000 lines of code.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: b22rian on August 02, 2015, 05:22:06 AM
I'll be posting teaser videos that outline new content and any changes throughout the next several days. Note: there are ten videos in total.



Gram,

thanks you so much for  creating these videos.
I cannot tell you how helpful they are to nam users in the community..
They are utterly fantastic as all your videos always are..  :thumbsup:

I wanted to quickly mention that I see you mention 10 videos in total.
On your u tube play list however I just checked now and there seems to be only 9 there ..
Are you still working on the last video than ?

Brian
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 02, 2015, 01:44:34 PM
I wanted to quickly mention that I see you mention 10 videos in total.
On your u tube play list however I just checked now and there seems to be only 9 there ..
Are you still working on the last video than ?

Due to problems with exporting, I had to cut one of the vids into two pieces and then add yet another video in between the two to emphasise the usefulness of the DRIs. So there's, I think, 11 or 12 videos in total now. I'm working on video 10 right now.

So, as a list of videos that I've already published:
 - Video 1: DRIs I (Type A1 and B1)
 - Video 2: Disconnector
 - Video 3: <SECRET FEATURE>
 - Video 4: <MYSTERY FEATURE>
 - Video 5: FlexFlys
 - Video 6: DRIs II (Type D1 and E1 Outside)
 - Video 7: RHW Changes (Uploaded prematurely)

Speaking of which, video 6 is now launched.

http://www.youtube.com/v/G4h0Jq2vClQ
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: LReyomeXX on August 02, 2015, 03:43:55 PM
What is this all about and am I supposed to be concerned

SEVERE: The XML file "resources\xml\RUL2_IID_structure.xml" is unreadable

It showed up during the Controller Compiler stage of the install, which because it's done in a command line prompt window, no log is saved.

I decided to use UniExtract to extract the entire installer to a folder, and this is where I have a backup located of the file. I know you use these NSIS installers to stop people from fixing problems on their own without a reinstall

Code: [Select]
I:\Temp1_NetworkAddonMod_33PR.zip\NetworkAddonMod Setup 33-PR\$_OUTDIR\Controller Compiler\resources\xml\RUL2_IID_structure.xml
is where my backup is
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: NielsC007 on August 02, 2015, 03:46:42 PM
The RHW 8C L2 E1 exits seems to have to wrong textures and models. The paths are fine though.

(http://i.imgur.com/viOPcdC.jpg)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 02, 2015, 06:56:31 PM
What is this all about and am I supposed to be concerned

SEVERE: The XML file "resources\xml\RUL2_IID_structure.xml" is unreadable

It's not actually anything to worry about, functionally everything is working, some erroneous code or such produces the error, it should be sorted for the final release.

Quote
I know you use these NSIS installers to stop people from fixing problems on their own without a reinstall

Whilst you are correct in a sense, that is that we wouldn't officially support users doing this, that's not really the rationale behind the installer.

The installer has one of the most efficient compression algorithms out there which is a massive benefit in terms of bandwidth - we've just hit over 1GB for the NAM package with the latest build incidentally - but also it makes far more sense for users. With such a number of options and what is a pretty complex mod, it would simply be a nightmare to do anything except package it into an installer. Unlike many installers on the LEX/STEX at least you can manually extract it, if you want to do that and know what you are doing, generally speaking we're fine with that, just don't expect our help if it goes wrong.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 02, 2015, 10:04:24 PM
The RHW 8C L2 E1 exits seems to have to wrong textures and models. The paths are fine though.

The textures and models were actually fine, but they weren't being used, as the E1 exemplars were referencing the B1 models.  It's now fixed. :thumbsup:

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Geometry123 on August 02, 2015, 11:49:03 PM
So close. ;D

(http://i.imgur.com/rDdb6G8.jpg)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: woodb3kmaster on August 02, 2015, 11:52:34 PM
The textures and models were actually fine, but they weren't being used, as the E1 exemplars were referencing the B1 models.  It's now fixed. :thumbsup:

-Alex
Might a similar coding error be behind why the 8C A2 ramp doesn't override to L1/L2? If Ganaram's new periodic table is correct (and I have no reason to doubt it is), that ramp should have elevated models. Perhaps the model references didn't get copy/pasted?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 03, 2015, 12:05:00 AM
Might a similar coding error be behind why the 8C A2 ramp doesn't override to L1/L2? If Ganaram's new periodic table is correct (and I have no reason to doubt it is), that ramp should have elevated models. Perhaps the model references didn't get copy/pasted?

Thing is, I don't think there are any ramps like that.

Also, these are the only Dedicated DRIs that I know for sure have elevated versions (there are probably I may have missed; ramps obtained by overriding a ramp using a different network don't count):
 - RHW-2 Type D1 and E1
 - RHW-4 Type D1 Outside and Inside
 - RHW-6S Type A2
 - RHW-6S Type D2
 - RHW-8S Type D2
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 03, 2015, 02:47:10 AM
The 8C A2 is indeed without an elevated version, so that's an intentional omission (no models).  I think there are A1, B1, D1, and E1 across the board (for the networks that can have them, excluding the L1/L2 RHW-3).  Because of the 6S overhang, the 8S also cannot have a normal D1, nor can the 6S have an A1. The only A2 that's elevated is the 6S, and the only D2 elevated ramps are the 6S and 8S.  There are no B2 or E2 elevated ramps as of yet, nor are there any elevated wide ramps (hence Geometry123's issue).  We did add a ton of elevated ramps this version, but this is still Phase 1 of a longer-term project.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Kuewr665 on August 03, 2015, 03:45:04 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/Jht9oqM.jpg)

When I place a FlexRamp Type A2, it looks like the setup on the lower left, and when I try to drag RHW from it, it reverts to RHW-2.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 03, 2015, 03:52:04 AM
When I place a FlexRamp Type A2, it looks like the setup on the lower left, and when I try to drag RHW from it, it reverts to RHW-2.

Already reported (Issue #219) and fixed on our end. (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/219)  It'll work properly in the finalized NAM 33 release.  In the meanwhile, the draggable version of that ramp is unaffected--see woodb3kmaster's diagram (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=17038.msg496605#msg496605) if you're unsure of the pattern needed to do so.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: townfolk on August 03, 2015, 05:28:05 AM
Hi,

In Nam 33, does transitions exist for going from 5 or 4 lane one-way road into 4(8s) or 5(10s) lane RHW?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 03, 2015, 05:30:58 AM
Unfortunately, there are no functioning transitions to go between OWR-4-to-RHW-8S or OWR-5-to-RHW-10S.  Those probably won't be added until we begin to revisit the NWM, and at this point, I don't know when that will be.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: dyoungyn on August 03, 2015, 06:59:20 AM
NAM Team,

WONDERFUL and GREAT work you all have achieved NAM Team.  I follow this and other NAM forums for updates of FANTASTIC things to come. 

My only question/concern is will the dragable ramps be slope tolerant?  I primarily make this type of ramps for more realism THANKS to such wonderful people such as the NAM TEAM.  AGAIN, GREAT thanks and simply REMARKABLE!

dyoungyn
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: woodb3kmaster on August 03, 2015, 07:10:10 AM
The 8C A2 is indeed without an elevated version, so that's an intentional omission (no models) ... We did add a ton of elevated ramps this version, but this is still Phase 1 of a longer-term project.

-Alex

Sorry to hear that. If it isn't too difficult, I'm willing to learn how to make elevated ramps, from start to finish - models, paths, etc. All I need are the relevant tutorials and the elevated RHW model parts and specs, and I can give it a try.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 03, 2015, 12:47:10 PM
Video 8 has now been published. (For those wondering, it was previously unlisted.)

http://www.youtube.com/v/NoUBt1vNb7I
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 03, 2015, 03:28:53 PM
My only question/concern is will the dragable ramps be slope tolerant?  I primarily make this type of ramps for more realism THANKS to such wonderful people such as the NAM TEAM.  AGAIN, GREAT thanks and simply REMARKABLE!

Intersections produced by dragging flatten slopes, and many of the patterns for the draggables use intersections, so at those points, they will not have slope tolerance (though the rest will), but they should still behave better than the old puzzle piece ramp interfaces.  The FLEXRamp system is designed to be the more slope-tolerant version, and uses 04 INRUL flags at the intersection points, which don't create the same flattening effect.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: fire on August 03, 2015, 05:39:34 PM
allez vous faire des  nouveaux ponts
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Kitsune on August 03, 2015, 06:17:26 PM
We just need some kind of non-video printable guide too. I'm the SME for my company's IT service catalog .. that is over 600+ items, and no way can I fit even more in my head.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 03, 2015, 06:22:32 PM
allez vous faire des  nouveaux ponts

Translated: You'll make new bridges?

We will have some new bridges in NAM 34.

Français: Nous aurons quelques nouveaux ponts dans NAM 34.

We just need some kind of non-video printable guide too. I'm the SME for my company's IT service catalog .. that is over 600+ items, and no way can I fit even more in my head.

We're still figuring out just what will happen with the non-video documentation.  I know with the new draggable ramps, we do have some visuals that will be unveiled shortly.  I did a SimTarkus post (https://simtarkus.wordpress.com/) on the broader topic earlier.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jack_wilds on August 03, 2015, 06:30:40 PM
HI and Hello from a dry and we need rain now Fox Valley

congrats on getting to this juncture with NAM33...  :)

looks promising  :thumbsup: &apls

and as such, I got mine!   :bnn: :bnn: :bnn:

so if I should find anything worth reporting...  %confuso  I will pass it along  ???

  :satisfied: :popcorn:
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Kitsune on August 03, 2015, 08:22:56 PM
allez vous faire des  nouveaux ponts

Translated: You'll make new bridges?

We will have some new bridges in NAM 34.

Français: Nous aurons quelques nouveaux ponts dans NAM 34.

We just need some kind of non-video printable guide too. I'm the SME for my company's IT service catalog .. that is over 600+ items, and no way can I fit even more in my head.

We're still figuring out just what will happen with the non-video documentation.  I know with the new draggable ramps, we do have some visuals that will be unveiled shortly.  I did a SimTarkus post (https://simtarkus.wordpress.com/) on the broader topic earlier.

-Alex

New bridges? More Details? ie networks  ;D
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 03, 2015, 08:28:51 PM
I can't remember off the top of my head as to just what those new bridges are, but we already have a modest stockpile of stuff started for the NAM after this one.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on August 03, 2015, 08:31:37 PM
Well in terms of bridges these are some I made a while ago for the RHW...

(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg72/Eggman121/RHW4Bridges_zps7bd135c6.jpg) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RHW4Bridges_zps7bd135c6.jpg.html)

(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg72/Eggman121/RHW%206S%20Bridge_zpszeoa0ilw.jpg) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RHW%206S%20Bridge_zpszeoa0ilw.jpg.html)

(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg72/Eggman121/RHW%204%20Bridges_zps2gflwg4n.jpg) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RHW%204%20Bridges_zps2gflwg4n.jpg.html)



These may make it in. They are a hybrid between the DBE and the  Normal Bridges. As you know you can't put too bridges together but a Bridge and a DBE setup breaks this lock.

(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg72/Eggman121/RHW_6C_Bridge1_zpsef3f9245.jpg) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RHW_6C_Bridge1_zpsef3f9245.jpg.html)

(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg72/Eggman121/RHW_6C_Bridge2_zpsa0f64ea3.jpg) (http://s245.photobucket.com/user/Eggman121/media/RHW_6C_Bridge2_zpsa0f64ea3.jpg.html)

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Simcoug on August 03, 2015, 08:42:41 PM
Eggman, I know you had been working on a variety of RRW bridges... will those make it into NAM 33? 
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on August 03, 2015, 08:48:17 PM
Eggman, I know you had been working on a variety of RRW bridges... will those make it into NAM 33? 

Unfortunately the answer is No. I still need to tidy up some things and there is already enough work on our plate so they won't make it in this round. But it is most certain that they will make it in at a later stage.

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Simcoug on August 03, 2015, 09:25:37 PM
No worries - needless to say, I can't wait to get 'em :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: woodb3kmaster on August 04, 2015, 03:17:17 AM
With all the new draggable ramps in NAM 33, there are a lot of new drag patterns to learn. Ganaram has done very well in demonstrating these patterns in his videos, but it isn't all that easy to refer to a video while you're playing SC4. Having a static image to look at while building your RHWs is much easier (especially if you can look at it on a smartphone or tablet). With that in mind, and after getting it vetted by the NAM Team, I proudly present: the compendium of DRI drag patterns!

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54771042/dri-table.png)
(Click for full resolution.)

This image shows how to draw every DRI in existence with color-coded arrows. Each color represents a distinct step in the dragging process, beginning with the yellow arrows. The placement of disconnectors for building Inside DRIs is also shown, as are extra steps for converting a RHW-6S Type X2 DRI into the equivalent RHW-8C and 10S ramps (with the blue and purple arrows, respectively). This guide should give you all the information you need to build any DRI you want.

Enjoy!
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: b22rian on August 04, 2015, 04:01:07 AM
Zack,

this is an incredibly useful idea you have put together to further supplement Gram's videos to help RHW users work with the new NAM 33 Build.

The community could not possibly thank you enough for this  &apls

amazing work here my friend !

Brian
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 04, 2015, 06:43:36 AM
Seconded, I know the similar thing that was done for the Dragable Road FAR setup a little while back is my number 1 reference too. I think you probably deserve a Karma Point for your work here if someone could action that on my behalf.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: CasperVg on August 04, 2015, 07:07:25 AM
Thanks a lot for that helpful guide. Well deserved K-point indeed.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on August 04, 2015, 08:01:44 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/XuEJteJ.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/g8C5VDb.png)

Autoconnect utterly destroys the usability of Flexcurves for everything except RHW-2. Ironically, only Flexcurves are affected.

(http://i.imgur.com/gPSvs8h.png)
Situations like this are physically impossible with the new pieces.

Yeah, if you can fix this, you'll be serving hard time.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Abrams124 on August 04, 2015, 10:05:18 AM
Hmm strange for me this isn't an issue,anyways you can use the disconnector piece,also if you draw the inner curve before the outer,it won't autoconnect.
Also why is it ironic that only flexcurves are affected?ploppable curves can't be overriden by draggable components.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on August 04, 2015, 10:19:31 AM
I'd say it's a bug in the footprint. May have something to do with being LHD or using the EUR disc version.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Abrams124 on August 04, 2015, 10:32:57 AM
LHD might be possible,but the disc,i don't think so
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 04, 2015, 10:44:46 AM
Autoconnect utterly destroys the usability of Flexcurves for everything except RHW-2. Ironically, only Flexcurves are affected.

(http://i.imgur.com/gPSvs8h.png)
Situations like this are physically impossible with the new pieces.

Yeah, if you can fix this, you'll be serving hard time.

(http://i887.photobucket.com/albums/ac72/GDO29Anagram/capture_mrc_semiadjacency.jpg)

Already been fixed when we fixed the A2 FlexRamps. No longer an issue.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Teaservid #9
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 04, 2015, 12:18:24 PM
Video 9 has now been published. This shows how Cosmetic Pieces interact with Dedicated DRIs in general. Spoiler alert: starters aren't needed for some of these.

http://www.youtube.com/v/r3luVXqJfoA
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Ryan Bharath on August 04, 2015, 05:27:07 PM
http://i.imgur.com/DQKgFTc.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/DQKgFTc.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/DQKgFTc.jpg)

Does anyone know how to fix this?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 04, 2015, 05:31:12 PM
There isn't a way to fix that, unfortunately.  It's not possible to stack a FLEXFly over another FLEXFly.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: titanicbuff on August 04, 2015, 09:57:22 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/jNKpqm1.png)
glitch
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 04, 2015, 09:58:11 PM
glitch

Unconverted overhangs, more so with the third-party textures.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 04, 2015, 10:02:29 PM
And it's already been reported (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/220).  The issues with the Ontario texture set are well-established.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Simcoug on August 04, 2015, 10:50:05 PM
I haven't had a chance to dive into NAM 33 yet, I just wanted to give a shout out to Ganaram for producing some great reference videos... these will be immensely helpful going forward.   &apls

Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 04, 2015, 11:07:31 PM
I haven't had a chance to dive into NAM 33 yet, I just wanted to give a shout out to Ganaram for producing some great reference videos... these will be immensely helpful going forward.

I also have a playlist for the entire series as well. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLp1o2hISGI7SD6DLbPg-XOmSN6zXdzpzV

Actually, you may find Zack's diagram on the last page to be just as useful as well; it sums up all of the current DRIs that currently exist; even more so, it contains ramp interfaces for ramp interfaces that I've yet to even show because I've yet to publish the relevant videos.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Simcoug on August 04, 2015, 11:14:15 PM
I haven't had a chance to dive into NAM 33 yet, I just wanted to give a shout out to Ganaram for producing some great reference videos... these will be immensely helpful going forward.

I also have a playlist for the entire series as well. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLp1o2hISGI7SD6DLbPg-XOmSN6zXdzpzV

Actually, you may find Zack's diagram on the last page to be just as useful as well; it sums up all of the current DRIs that currently exist; even more so, it contains ramp interfaces for ramp interfaces that I've yet to even show because I've yet to publish the relevant videos.

Awesome - thanks for the link (saved!)
No doubt that is a useful diagram, (and another save!)... I just have a soft spot for videos (used to work in TV, so I understand a bit out video production) and I know they can sometimes be a bit of work.   :thumbsup:
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: woodb3kmaster on August 05, 2015, 12:11:02 AM
These may make it in. They are a hybrid between the DBE and the  Normal Bridges. As you know you can't put too bridges together but a Bridge and a DBE setup breaks this lock.

I'm very interested in how you made this hybrid setup work, and whether the T21s are part of the bridge or the DBE components. If it's the former, my dream of RHW-xC suspension bridges (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15953.0) may finally be achievable without any of the modding hijinks mentioned in that thread; the bridge tile models could simply overhang across the whole width of the bridge. Is this something you'd be interested in working on, Stephen?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on August 05, 2015, 12:27:25 AM
Hello Zack

First of all thank you for your kind words  :thumbsup:

Yes I would be interested in making such a bridge  ;)

The DBE Normal Bridge Hybrid basically works by using normal Bridges as the outside Tiles and the center is just your normal draggable flat terrain Network. As such You could get two RHW bridges and assuming that there is a starter for the RRW you could have a railway line between the two bridges.

So back to the chase, a Normal Bridge and a DBE Setup can coexist right next to each other. So I exploited this fact to have a compact Bridge by Modeling the sides.

Furthermore with this discovery It should be possible to make a suspension Bridge based on the info presented. You would have to make to distinct half's however but It would work out.

Alignment of the pylons is the reason behind this.

Thanks again

-Stephen

Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: titanicbuff on August 05, 2015, 12:43:34 AM
oddly had someone say tonight that its ashame there were no C-bridges
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: fire on August 05, 2015, 10:06:10 AM
pouvez vous faire des ponts levis
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 05, 2015, 10:12:16 AM
pouvez vous faire des ponts levis

Translation: Can you make drawbridges?

Non, malheureusement. (No, unfortunately.)

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 05, 2015, 10:20:11 AM
pouvez vous faire des ponts levis

EN: Functional drawbridges aren't possible.

FR: Ponts-levis fonctionnels ne sont pas possibles.

I'm very interested in how you made this hybrid setup work, and whether the T21s are part of the bridge or the DBE components. If it's the former, my dream of RHW-xC suspension bridges (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=15953.0) may finally be achievable without any of the modding hijinks mentioned in that thread; the bridge tile models could simply overhang across the whole width of the bridge.
The DBE Normal Bridge Hybrid basically works by using normal Bridges as the outside Tiles and the center is just your normal draggable flat terrain Network. As such You could get two RHW bridges and assuming that there is a starter for the RRW you could have a railway line between the two bridges.

So back to the chase, a Normal Bridge and a DBE Setup can coexist right next to each other. So I exploited this fact to have a compact Bridge by Modeling the sides.

Furthermore with this discovery It should be possible to make a suspension Bridge based on the info presented. You would have to make to distinct half's however but It would work out.

This is why I sometimes think that the Diagonal Bridge Enabler should be called the Draggable Bridge Enabler. Why stop at suspension bridges? You could very well BAT a blank bridge with no pillars at all and have DBE pieces that have, say, cable-stayed towers attached to them via T21s. Granted, they'd be massive props, but they'd work the same way as Zack describes with a suspension bridge. There'd also be a set of pillar pieces for the middle section, but there would be several different pieces reserved so that you could have any design of pillar you want; this is more in line with making a beam bridge.

Northern California's done a weird thing in which they replaced an old truss bridge with a self-anchored monstrosity:

http://www.youtube.com/v/GDUIYZKlknk

Barring the fact that such a bridge would need to be curved, if such a bridge was made using the draggable bridge method, you could very well have a hybrid bridge and even a bridge that is 5 tiles wide: singular tower for the self-anchored suspension bridge, and then the rest of the way would be a simple beam bridge. This would be an RHW-10S bridge separated by a one-tile gap. Or you could, well, not have the gap.

Here's how it could work: each singular RHW-10S bridge is a half-and-half hybrid of a standard bridge (the inner section) and draggable bridge (the outer section; or the whole thing could be draggable). Puzzle piece props go on the outer section, including the bridge tower and the pillars for the rest of the bridge.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 05, 2015, 10:30:15 AM
This is why I sometimes think that the Diagonal Bridge Enabler should be called the Draggable Bridge Enabler.

Technically, all the standard bridges are draggable, but oddly enough, a few of the items in the DBE (the rail stuff ArkenbergeJoe did) are puzzle-based.  I was almost thinking we ought to change it to the "Advanced Bridge Enabler", which, amusingly enough, would create the acronym ABE.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 05, 2015, 10:36:19 AM
Technically, all the standard bridges are draggable, but oddly enough, a few of the items in the DBE (the rail stuff ArkenbergeJoe did) are puzzle-based.  I was almost thinking we ought to change it to the "Advanced Bridge Enabler", which, amusingly enough, would create the acronym ABE.

I think "draggable" in the sense that you could very well drag a bridge in some wacky angle. And curved. And with height changes. And with an interchange in the middle of the water. The fact that you could only build orthogonal bridges using the standard bridge method doesn't sound very draggable to me, and it conserves the current DBE acronym.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Teaservid #10
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 05, 2015, 02:52:12 PM
Rampage IV.

http://www.youtube.com/v/Cnau0CSATQA
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: woodb3kmaster on August 05, 2015, 11:40:36 PM
The DBE Normal Bridge Hybrid basically works by using normal Bridges as the outside Tiles and the center is just your normal draggable flat terrain Network. As such You could get two RHW bridges and assuming that there is a starter for the RRW you could have a railway line between the two bridges.

So back to the chase, a Normal Bridge and a DBE Setup can coexist right next to each other. So I exploited this fact to have a compact Bridge by Modeling the sides.

First, let me thank you for being willing to make a RHW-xC suspension bridge. Your method for building your 6C bridge is quite clever, and I'm sure it will work great for suspension bridges as well.

Furthermore with this discovery It should be possible to make a suspension Bridge based on the info presented. You would have to make to distinct half's however but It would work out.

Alignment of the pylons is the reason behind this.

I can see why this would be the case. Looking at the Maxis Medium Suspension Bridge RULs, it's obvious that dragging the halves of the bridge from opposite sides, as one normally has to do with paired one-way bridges, would end up misaligning the pylon halves - and, even worse, the tower halves. So we would end up having to make two different bridges that are mirror images of each other - one dragged with the flow of its traffic, and one dragged against the flow.

At the same time, though, the fact that I could only find that one suspension bridge's RULs in SimCity_1.dat suggests that some suspension bridges don't require RULs. Even the Akashi Kaikyo Bridge doesn't have any RULs in the NAM Bridge Controller, and it can be drawn at any length that is at least its MinSpan value. So it's possible that we could design an 8C suspension bridge that has a fixed EndSupportInterval, ensuring that the tower/pylon halves would align as long as the bridge halves are the same length and their ends are aligned - even if each half of the bridge were dragged from opposite ends. If we can do that, we won't need to model distinct halves; only one half will need to be modeled. Does that sound feasible to you?



For those of you who haven't yet tried to build complicated interchanges, let me demonstrate just what you can do with NAM 33:

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54771042/nam33-cloverstack.jpg)

Every part of this cloverstack is either dragged or a Flex piece; it contains no static puzzle pieces at all. I'll leave you to figure out which parts are draggable and which are Flex pieces. There are some things I can't spoil for you right now. ;)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 06, 2015, 01:16:33 AM
For those of you who haven't yet tried to build complicated interchanges, let me demonstrate just what you can do with NAM 33:

I'll say one thing: with the exception of high-complexity pieces (like FlexFly and on-slope transitions) and elevated starters, and given the right overrides, you could very well create a draggable interchange.

I think everyone at home can see the ramifications of such a feat. $%Grinno$%
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Teaservid #11, and FlexRamps
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 06, 2015, 04:08:10 PM
Rampage V.

http://www.youtube.com/v/Pw9aux7Qye0

This marks the final video in the (now) eleven-part series on all new RealHighway content. In the interests of time (and also because I just installed Windows 10, have a furniture restoration project, and a major dentist appointment coming up), I cannot create a 12th video describing the changes to the FlexRamps. I will, however, list them out, so please pay close attention.

 - The Type A2 FlexRamp has been changed from a three-tile long ramp to a four-tile long ramp, to fit with the size of the Type D2 Ramp.
 - All X2 Ramps have been rebased and as such, have had certain tiles rearranged. If a ramp interface looks like its tiles have been scrambled, just click on it to restore it.
 - With the case of the Type A2 FlexRamp and how it's now one tile longer, if you have put FlexRamps and Cosmetic Pieces really close to each other, you will have to rebuild those setups.
 - Type D2 and E2 Ramps have been remade such that they now default to RHW-6S instead of RHW-8S. The footprints for these have changed such that they require one less tile than before. These may fare better than the Type A2 FlexRamp.
 - Type A1 and B1 Inside FlexRamps now default to Inside MIS instead of inside RHW-4. If the RHW-4's extending out of these ramps are long enough, you will be fine. Otherwise, be prepared to add starters.
 - There are NO Type D1 and E1 Inside Ramps right now.
 - There are also NO Type A1 Wide, D1 Wide, A2 Wide, or D2 Wide FlexRamps. Some existing FlexRamps, like Type B1 and D1, may be converted to Types A1 Wide and D1 Wide, but this may be a problem for the Type X2 Ramps.
 - There may still be a number of autoconnect issues with the FlexRamps, preventing the proper usage of many of the new ramps. As the current set of DRIs is so extensive that they fulfil many of the functions of FlexRamps, it is recommended to use the Type X2 DRIs if you find any autoconnect issues with the FlexRamps.
 - Note that the DRIs are NOT a replacement to FlexRamps. As powerful and advanced as DRIs are, their main downfall is memorisation of patterns and lack of slope tolerance. The purpose of FlexRamps is to handle both of those issues, and granted, it may take time for both systems to be perfected. However, just don't think that one system is better than the other by what it does; both systems are important and both systems have their place.

And with that, I leave you guys with the playlist for all of the videos I have; all eleven of them. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLp1o2hISGI7SD6DLbPg-XOmSN6zXdzpzV (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLp1o2hISGI7SD6DLbPg-XOmSN6zXdzpzV)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Kitsune on August 06, 2015, 04:22:34 PM
Hello Zack

First of all thank you for your kind words  :thumbsup:

Yes I would be interested in making such a bridge  ;)

The DBE Normal Bridge Hybrid basically works by using normal Bridges as the outside Tiles and the center is just your normal draggable flat terrain Network. As such You could get two RHW bridges and assuming that there is a starter for the RRW you could have a railway line between the two bridges.

So back to the chase, a Normal Bridge and a DBE Setup can coexist right next to each other. So I exploited this fact to have a compact Bridge by Modeling the sides.

Furthermore with this discovery It should be possible to make a suspension Bridge based on the info presented. You would have to make to distinct half's however but It would work out.

Alignment of the pylons is the reason behind this.

Thanks again

-Stephen

Would this mean the tsing ma lower deck could be put into use ?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 06, 2015, 06:50:54 PM
Theoretically, one *could* produce a DBE-type setup involving a dual-network.  The Tsing Ma Double Deck did actually work for the most part, but it had the weird glitch in which the traffic congestion data view would turn beet red as soon as any rail traffic came on board.  Having tested it extensively sometime back in 2008, IIRC, this is merely a display issue, however.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: thomaslc on August 08, 2015, 06:48:48 AM
This is a masterpiece. Congratulations to all the team.

It seems the FlexRamp E1 for 8S L0 isn't working, as shown in the attached screenshot. I've tried various things and wasn't able to make it work.
Anyone can reproduce?

Thanks!
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Kitsune on August 08, 2015, 02:00:27 PM
And .. I cant seem to get Diagonal MIS to work under the flex fly:

(http://glidingeagle.com/images/sc4/nampr33/n33a.jpg)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 08, 2015, 02:09:53 PM
And .. I cant seem to get Diagonal MIS to work under the flex fly:

FlexFly×Diagonals (in which diagonal networks cross underneath) aren't supported. I'm not sure if they could be.



It seems the FlexRamp E1 for 8S L0 isn't working, as shown in the attached screenshot. I've tried various things and wasn't able to make it work.

You need to draw the RHW-8S outer stub as far into the FlexRamp as possible.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: thomaslc on August 09, 2015, 03:38:46 AM
You need to draw the RHW-8S outer stub as far into the FlexRamp as possible.

Yup, that's what I'm doing. With the D1, it works fine, the extra square gets used. With the E1, as soon as I draw the outer edge of the 8S into it, it turns into what is in the screenshot.

I seem to be having troubles with the Flex E2 too using 8S, I took three screenshots showing the whole sequence. It's weird because the preview works fine, and as soon as I release the mouse button, it goes nuts. Any hint?

Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 09, 2015, 03:48:20 AM
I seem to be having troubles with the Flex E2 too using 8S, I took three screenshots showing the whole sequence. It's weird because the preview works fine, and as soon as I release the mouse button, it goes nuts.

This is a known issue that I've pointed out in a post above: X2 FlexRamps are prone to autoconnect bugs and may be like that for a while. The interim solution is to use the DRI versions of those ramps.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: thomaslc on August 09, 2015, 04:05:55 AM
Thank you! Sorry for missing the previous post about it, there's quite a lot of (technical) content in this thread ;)

EDIT : worked perfectly using DRI. :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Synthael on August 12, 2015, 10:14:08 AM
Thanks for the awesome update, I'm having fun with overwriting all old ramp pieces with DRIs, with a few clicks and drags you can have almost any interchange you want.
 :thumbsup:
However, I found some annoyances, nothing major:
(note: I use LHD SC4 Deluxe, disc version updated to the latest patch)

1. some ramps are having texture problems on one to three tiles, most likely some mirroring or placement problems, paths are all ok. Using default textures as Euro tex pack isn't updated yet, deleted all euro texture files from plugins folder
    Pic1 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/3jz8ltjqfy7t6ji/error1.png)
    Pic2 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/vwdw9dnt2ufvjhy/error2.png)

2. Y splitters for GLR (both draggable and puzzle based have RHD paths instead LHD

As I said, nothing major, when you have the chance, look into it. If I find anything else, will report.

And now back to remaking some of the interchanges with new ramps  ;D
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 12, 2015, 07:43:18 PM
Synthael, thanks for the report, and glad to hear you're enjoying the NAM 33 Pre-Release!

#1 was caused by some extraneous textures still being present in the LHD support file for the RHW.  I did a couple updates to the version of it on our private repository, cleaning out a bunch of stuff in there, so it should be fixed now.

We hadn't caught #2 before (it's likely been there for years), and thanks to your report, one of my colleagues (mgb204) has fixed it on our end (I just need to merge his patch into the main file).

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: matias93 on August 13, 2015, 07:42:37 PM
I don't know if this is a known bug, or begun in this pre-release (because I never used RHW before), but when adding lots aside RHW pieces (draggable and puzzle), they change texture, specifically to a narrower one, and yellow-lined, that coincides with the smooth curves the MIS makes automatically. Is barely an esthetic problem, but it makes some weird mixes in textures.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 13, 2015, 07:55:44 PM
Are you by chance using Euro textures?  That sounds like the most likely explanation, as the current RHW Euro textures are of a different width, and likely aren't wealthified to handle adjacent mid/high-density zones (while the default US textures are).

This is a known issue (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/220).  That said, there's some complications with fixing that one.  The Euro textures were MandelSoft's baby, but he's since largely retired from SC4 development to focus on Euro Truck Simulator, and his attempts to find help to continue to maintain the set for future releases have not had any success.  We'd definitely like to be able to have Euro textures working for the NAM 33 official release, but we need to find a solution that doesn't involve burying the remainder of our existing active developers in a lot of texture work.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Geometry123 on August 14, 2015, 10:02:07 PM
(http://orig01.deviantart.net/2766/f/2015/226/3/4/untitled_by_geometrymathalgebra-d95po4g.png)

Can confirm that traffic won't go through the affected area, considering UDI terminates abruptly there.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 15, 2015, 12:48:14 AM
Already reported (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/250).

Edit: And I went ahead and knocked it out.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Moonraker0 on August 18, 2015, 04:27:22 AM
I found a couple issues in this version that I didn't see on the GitHub tracker:


Good work with the new NAM pre-release though! :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 18, 2015, 03:09:11 PM
I found a couple issues in this version that I didn't see on the GitHub tracker:

  • No model for the RHW-6S to RHW-8S L2 entrance FLEXramp, despite that this is said to be supported in the ramp's tooltip.  I haven't tried dragging it yet.
  • No model for the new DDRHW-4 bridge.  I saw that these had disappeared from my city and thought I'd just redraw them, but found that they were still invisible afterwards.

Good work with the new NAM pre-release though! :)

The DDRHW bridge one was already found, and has since been fixed (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/224) (there's the "Closed" issues, too, on Github).

As far as that FLEXRamp, there's several that would entail an 8S slimming down to a 6S . . . which specific one was it?  The D1 and A2 wouldn't be possible at elevation due to the overhangs, the E1 may or may not be in there (can't remember at the moment), and the B2 and E2 aren't supported yet because they don't have models.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Moonraker0 on August 18, 2015, 04:23:08 PM
As far as that FLEXRamp, there's several that would entail an 8S slimming down to a 6S . . . which specific one was it?  The D1 and A2 wouldn't be possible at elevation due to the overhangs, the E1 may or may not be in there (can't remember at the moment), and the B2 and E2 aren't supported yet because they don't have models.

-Alex
Oh right, I forgot to mention which ramp it was.  It was the L2 type D1 RHW-6 to RHW-8 entrance ramp FLEXramp.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 18, 2015, 07:31:31 PM
Thanks, Moonraker--if it's a D1, that's one that couldn't be done with those networks due to the overhang issue (the 6S overhang would collide into the MIS).  I'll correct the LTEXT to remove the reference to the L1 and L2 8S.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: roadgeek on August 18, 2015, 10:13:36 PM
I ran into an issue with RHW-6C L1 over RHW-6C L0. I will add an image as soon as I have a chance to capture it, but it is the center piece in the bridge that reverts to RHW-2xRHW-2. The other eight tiles render correctly.

Fantastic job NAM team!!!! This release is simply AMAZING!!!  &apls &apls &apls &apls &apls
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 19, 2015, 01:11:22 AM
I've confirmed that one--an oddly annoying one to come up.  I'll add a band-aid in now to fix it, until the MetaRUL system is fully in place.

Edit: It's now been fixed (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/261).

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Geometry123 on August 20, 2015, 06:52:01 AM
(http://orig08.deviantart.net/deb5/f/2015/232/1/8/reverse_by_geometrymathalgebra-d96fgar.png)

;D
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: vester on August 20, 2015, 07:22:23 AM
Missing support or what ?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: JoeST on August 20, 2015, 08:00:22 AM
texture/direction flip
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 20, 2015, 02:43:46 PM
That one may have to wait until the MetaRUL system is in place.  I'll give it a look, but it may end up being a needle-in-the-haystack sort of search.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: noahclem on August 20, 2015, 04:11:24 PM
Those kinds of flipping occur in quite a number of situations, at least when you start building interchanges at the level of complexity that your appears to be. ~75% can be solved easily by clicking around nearby and another 15-20% will eventually work if you are determined enough and really try every possible combination of clicking. Unfortunately there remain a number of situations that persistence can't yet solve at this time. In the likely case that you already knew all that hopefully someone else reading is helped and most importantly it's great to know there's a solution on the horizon for these cases  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: LReyomeXX on August 20, 2015, 07:45:59 PM
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v282/LReyome29/th_2015-08-20-1750-00.mp4) (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v282/LReyome29/2015-08-20-1750-00.mp4)

Has this actually been documented yet. I stumbled on it earlier when playing around with RHW-6S ramps
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 20, 2015, 07:55:33 PM
If you're referring to those dedicated ramp interface drag patterns, they are documented in the DRI diagrams that woodb3kmaster did awhile ago (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=17038.msg496794#msg496794), as well as Ganaram's videos.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 20, 2015, 09:46:23 PM
Has this actually been documented yet. I stumbled on it earlier when playing around with RHW-6S ramps

It's a documented feature, and has been for ages now. The relevant documentation's been available in the past pages already.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 21, 2015, 01:43:55 AM
Those kinds of flipping occur in quite a number of situations, at least when you start building interchanges at the level of complexity that your appears to be. ~75% can be solved easily by clicking around nearby and another 15-20% will eventually work if you are determined enough and really try every possible combination of clicking. Unfortunately there remain a number of situations that persistence can't yet solve at this time. In the likely case that you already knew all that hopefully someone else reading is helped and most importantly it's great to know there's a solution on the horizon for these cases  :thumbsup:

Having just tested this particular instance, clicking around does indeed fix it.  Some of its counterparts with other networks (i.e. L2 MIS over L1 RHW-4, L2 RHW-4 over L2 RHW-4) work perfectly fine, without any wrong flipping, so the solution may lie there. 

Edit: Found the needle in the haystack by comparing the working MIS-over-RHW-4 with the MIS-over-MIS version.  It was on the L2 side, and I've just fixed it.  I'm going to check to see if it's affecting any other MIS-over-MIS DxO situations.

Edit 2: Now fixed.  It affected all L2 Diagonal RHWs going over L1 Orth RHW-3, MIS, and RHW-6S.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: JP Schriefer on August 21, 2015, 02:01:21 AM
I installed the Pre-release and doesn't matter what I do, I choose people to drive on the left and they keep driving on the right. In NAM 32 I did almost the same configurations and it worked, is there something in this version which can conflict with it?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 21, 2015, 02:10:46 AM
The NAM doesn't change drive side, so if you tried to install left-side NAM files on your game, all you ended up with is a broken right-side driving game.  You'll need to go in and modify the registry to fix it.  This post by RippleJet (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=3961.0) should get you set up.  There's also an alternate method involving shortcut modification as described by smoncrie (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=3961.msg282741#msg282741), later in that same thread.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 21, 2015, 10:03:45 AM
That would probably work, but there is a much easier way without messing with the registry.


Basically setting the game to UK English mode makes sims drive as in the UK on the left side.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jimmyson on August 22, 2015, 03:36:58 AM
Something doesn't seem right. I'm sure it was fixed, but it can't handle a L0 fly-over in this configuration. Please correct me if I am wrong.

(http://i.imgur.com/Y0SUIBAl.png)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 22, 2015, 03:54:25 AM
The issue is an adjacency stability one--the FLEX Height Transitions are too close to the diagonal RHW-4.  There is no any code to support FLEX Height Transitions next to diagonal crossings, so it's reverting to RHW-2 there--it's not really a bug, as much as it is something we haven't added yet.  If you put an extra tile or two in between the transitions and the point where the L1 MIS is supposed to cross over the Diag RHW-4, it should work.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jimmyson on August 22, 2015, 04:57:21 AM
Thanks Tarkus.

And I have just spotted another, but first, congratulations goes to the RRW team for jumping onto this. I have previously posted before (SC4D and Simtropolis) about the rail crossing markings and boom gates. I thought to test this out. I remember that the locality can be changed to LHD with Regedit, or a shortcut parameter (as the Aussie SC4 is RHD by default.

Here are my findings:

Sample A:
(http://i.imgur.com/kftErHYl.png)
Sample B:
(http://i.imgur.com/MtwWVDpl.png)
Sample C:
(http://i.imgur.com/44qZzbFl.png)

This leads me to conclude that the T21 pieces for rail-crossings now match the road driving side, the textures still need updating. Now, maybe because I am using the AUS road markings, its only be implemented for the RHD side. The LHD textures are missing or not yet implemented...

EDIT: And it may seem other textures in the AUS Road Markings set have not been implemented for LHD

(http://i.imgur.com/yXLwl3el.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/YZRuxuLl.png)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 22, 2015, 07:52:04 AM
All the base RRW crossings are made for LHD, I believe there was some implementation error caused when the RRW folder was moved to a new home, that should be resolved for the final release, until then you can drop the attached files into the z___NAM\y_RealRailway folder and they should work. One note, you may have to rename the existing EU (RHD) crossing texture file, shown here in red, in order to ensure with the two added files that the load order is as follows:


There does appear to be a problem with the auto turning lane textures, but I could never quite get a handle on them, I think some are incorrectly flipped or ID'd for EU/LHD users. If I remember correctly the $ and $$$ wealth textures are correctly orientated, the problem is only with the $$ wealth textures reverting to RHD).

I don't think the Road-OWR texture was ever converted for LHD use, but that's a simple fix I should be able to sort. I'll take a proper look at the ATLs problem today and see if we can get them fixed for release also.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: JP Schriefer on August 22, 2015, 11:41:25 AM
Thanks Tarkus and mgb204 for your support, now it's fixed :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jimmyson on August 22, 2015, 10:53:03 PM
All the base RRW crossings are made for LHD, I believe there was some implementation error caused when the RRW folder was moved to a new home, that should be resolved for the final release, until then you can drop the attached files into the z___NAM\y_RealRailway folder and they should work. One note, you may have to rename the existing EU (RHD) crossing texture file, shown here in red, in order to ensure with the two added files that the load order is as follows:

  • aRRW Crossings LHD.dat
  • RRW Crossings EU Cosmetic.dat (this file should exist in the RRW folder already)
  • z_RRW Crossings EU Cosmetic LHD.dat
There does appear to be a problem with the auto turning lane textures, but I could never quite get a handle on them, I think some are incorrectly flipped or ID'd for EU/LHD users. If I remember correctly the $ and $$$ wealth textures are correctly orientated, the problem is only with the $$ wealth textures reverting to RHD).

I don't think the Road-OWR texture was ever converted for LHD use, but that's a simple fix I should be able to sort. I'll take a proper look at the ATLs problem today and see if we can get them fixed for release also.

Before I added the attachments to "y__RealRailway", I looked at the contents and found that "RRW Crossings EU Cosmetic.dat" was missing. I never tend to install the Euro cosmetics, just the Australian Road Markings.

(http://i.imgur.com/uTzZfaHl.png)

I also took a final look at the crossing's before adding the files, and found that the diagonal crossing have not being address, T21 and textures.
Plus, if you look carefully next the diagonal crossing, the rail does not align as its right next to a Orgothanial -> Diagonal rail piece.

(http://i.imgur.com/ilZanOfl.png)

After applying the files, the orgothaial crossing were fixed, but not the diagonal.

(http://i.imgur.com/6pD2uc3h.png)

EDIT: In regards to the turning lanes, I've comprised an album of the turning lanes in the zones. Only R$, C$, and non-Ag industry zones have an issue
https://imgur.com/a/5SNEO (https://imgur.com/a/5SNEO)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Indiana Joe on August 22, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
The curves are just a limitation of the RRW.  The default curve radius was widened, so curves take up an extra tile.  You'd just have to move the road or the railway one more tile away.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 23, 2015, 01:28:52 AM
Diagonals are usually fun, many of the diagonal/ortho crossing textures look better with no stoplines or stoplines covering both lanes as otherwise when flipped/mirrored the stoplines will not match your driving side. This is a limitation of the game insomuch as the additional textures needed to flip them correctly simply don't exist. However, roads are one of the few exceptions, generally flipped variants do have a separate ID, I am pretty sure I got them right being a LHD user myself. My personal textures only ever use stoplines on one lane where they will always display correctly and that's what these were derived from, therefore all the RRW base crossings should work similarly. - I've just double checked, mine are indeed correct, so I'll look into it.

I'm guessing they were not included as part of the Aus textures, that was probably overlooked. That said the LHD files I attached only contain the LHD overrides, without the regular US and/or EU RHD files also installed, many crossings for generic networks like Street, Ave, OWR & SAM will be missing, you may wish to check if you have those too.

Diagonal T21s I'm pretty sure have never been supported for LHD, since those don't come from RRW, rather the regular rail T21s. That's something I may consider rectifying, but it won't happen for NAM 33 I suspect, since there would likely be quite a lot of them scattered around.

Thanks also for documenting the RTL's (Road Turning Lanes), I knew it was a wealth issue of some kind, only I've looked at the textures before and simply couldn't find the problem, I'll give it another go over the next few days.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jimmyson on August 24, 2015, 03:07:13 AM
Thanks also for documenting the RTL's (Road Turning Lanes), I knew it was a wealth issue of some kind, only I've looked at the textures before and simply couldn't find the problem, I'll give it another go over the next few days.

You're welcome.

You might also want to look the T-junctions too...

I'm still using the LHD configuration.

(https://i.imgur.com/5h2Bfeml.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/wFEz7n4l.png)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: LReyomeXX on August 24, 2015, 05:59:47 PM
Are diagonal ramps really possible on the DRI, meaning the RHW goes diagonally, and you can draw ramps off of it. The puzzle piece diagonal ramps are marked "Depreciated." Is this a case of jumping the gun on declaration of depreciation?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 24, 2015, 06:25:27 PM
No, it's not jumping the gun at all.  While there aren't DRI versions of them yet for NAM 33, there are diagonal FLEXRamps, which start as RHW-2 ramps and can be overridden to produce RHW-4 ramps.  The one 6C diagonal ramp we have hasn't been converted yet, so that one isn't "deprecated".  There's really just six ramps under the original static puzzle piece "Ramps" button (plus the volleyball pieces) that aren't yet deprecated, and we're hoping to relegate those to the same status with NAM 34.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 24, 2015, 07:05:45 PM
...You might also want to look the T-junctions too...

After some digging I've realised where the problem comes from; there simply are no overrides for the 1-3 wealth textures for the LHD variants, hence they revert to RHD when you zone next to them. Because the 0 wealth textures exist, if the zoning changes to medium or high wealth (which uses the 0 wealth textures) they appear correctly again. Bizarrely 3 textures have a 1 wealth texture only, but no 2 & 3, in any case I've just ran them through and created the new wealth textures, so most of them now appear correctly. I say most, because I've found a few texture bugs that may require new textures to be made in the process.

:Update:

Got the texture issues cleared up sooner than I thought I would, I've attached the file here, it replaces the existing file "z1_MRTNRLN_EuroTextures_RTL_Road_LHD.dat" from "z___NAM\Road Textures\Euro Cosmetic Re-Texture Mod\z_LeftHandDriveSupport". If you'd like to double check it for me I'd appreciate the help. Note there is a 7-zip archive inside the zip archive since otherwise the file would be too large to attach here.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on August 24, 2015, 08:26:09 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/wFEz7n4l.png)
I've had that transition problem before when two intersections are in close proximity. I wonder if it still happens...

Also, with the RHW-6C to RHW-4 & RHW-2 piece, I noticed the RHW-2 part is shorter than the RHW-4 parts. I wonder if the construction piece will go there? just a thought...

(It'd be nice to have Flex Volleyball pieces as well...)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GDO29Anagram on August 24, 2015, 08:41:31 PM
Also, with the RHW-6C to RHW-4 & RHW-2 piece, I noticed the RHW-2 part is shorter than the RHW-4 parts. I wonder if the construction piece will go there? just a thought...

That all depends on the geometry of the overall pieces since I intend on having not only an RHW-6C Type D2 Dual Ramp, I'm also looking at Type E2 and DE2 Dual. And 8C A2/B2/AB2 Dual as well and 8C D3/E3/DE3 Dual. And 7C hybrid ramps.

Quote
(It'd be nice to have Flex Volleyball pieces as well...)

That all depends on what footprints could work, and whether JD is OK with me trashing his puzzle pieces. I've singlehandedly trashed, like, 90% of the non-FARHW puzzle-based ramps in existence.

Actually, they're puzzle-based because of how stop points work on RHW: they don't, and they need to hijack another network that does stop points.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 24, 2015, 09:50:38 PM
I've had that transition problem before when two intersections are in close proximity. I wonder if it still happens...

My guess would be the problem in the screenshot is because the LHD textures don't use the same IDs as the RHD ones, now the correct wealth textures exist, that should be resolved. Where this problem exists with RTLs close to each other is because the leftmost RTL (as shown in the example) would not require turn lanes because it's only a T-Junction, this is more of a limitation than a bug, just make the junction a cross or move it one tile and it should then work fine.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jimmyson on August 24, 2015, 11:18:24 PM
Got the texture issues cleared up sooner than I thought I would, I've attached the file here, it replaces the existing file "z1_MRTNRLN_EuroTextures_RTL_Road_LHD.dat" from "z___NAM\Road Textures\Euro Cosmetic Re-Texture Mod\z_LeftHandDriveSupport". If you'd like to double check it for me I'd appreciate the help. Note there is a 7-zip archive inside the zip archive since otherwise the file would be too large to attach here.

Applied the fix, can't see any changes (https://imgur.com/a/zjISy)...
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: memo on August 25, 2015, 02:52:40 AM
I've had that transition problem before when two intersections are in close proximity. I wonder if it still happens...

[…]Where this problem exists with RTLs close to each other is because the leftmost RTL (as shown in the example) would not require turn lanes because it's only a T-Junction, this is more of a limitation than a bug, just make the junction a cross or move it one tile and it should then work fine.

The RTL plugin does account for such setups in both LHT and RHT. I've just looked through the RTL RUL2 code and it looks like the textures 0x5f01bb00 and 0x5f01bc00 need to be swapped around in the original left-hand version of the RTL file. Additionally, 0x5f01de00 might need to be replaced by a blended turn-lane transition. Euro textures might be another story.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: tobsen on August 25, 2015, 02:57:01 AM
I have two short questions:

1) Will it be possible that there will be diagonal slope transitions and/or diagonal ramps for the rhw in the future? - I think they might be really useful.
2) Is it possible to build a raised curve (L1,L2,L3), like a flexyfly, that changes the level for exeample fron L1 to L0 or L2?

Cheers
Tobsen
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 25, 2015, 03:32:15 AM
Applied the fix, can't see any changes (https://imgur.com/a/zjISy)...

Indeed... if I had attached the correct file you might have  ::)... correct file attached to this post, sorry.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 25, 2015, 04:16:07 AM
The RTL plugin does account for such setups in both LHT and RHT. I've just looked through the RTL RUL2 code and it looks like the textures 0x5f01bb00 and 0x5f01bc00 need to be swapped around in the original left-hand version of the RTL file. Additionally, 0x5f01de00 might need to be replaced by a blended turn-lane transition. Euro textures might be another story.

(http://i991.photobucket.com/albums/af39/MGB204/Auto-RTL_zpsfnlzyopl.jpg~original)

As you can see (top) the pictured intersection works fine for LHD now, but since the TGIs of the texture vary between LHD/RHD I think that's where the issue that was shown came from.

Are you saying the second intersection (bottom) should also work? There was a problem with both 0x5F01DE00 & 0x5F01FE00 for LHD Euro textures, but I've fixed those - whereas 0x5f01bb00 and 0x5f01bc00 are identical.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: memo on August 25, 2015, 08:09:20 AM
Are you saying the second intersection (bottom) should also work? There was a problem with both 0x5F01DE00 & 0x5F01FE00 for LHD Euro textures, but I've fixed those - whereas 0x5f01bb00 and 0x5f01bc00 are identical.

Yes. The RTLs use distinct IIDs for tiles that have turning lanes in both RHD/LHD, or only in RHD, or only in LHD. This makes it difficult to figure out if there's a texture in the LHD version that should or shouldn't have a turning lane on it, as the corresponding RHD texture doesn't necessarily look the same.

I haven't looked at the Euro textures, but in the original US (LHD) version 0x5f01bc00 is a double-sided transition (presumably, the incorrect texture in your picture), whereas 0x5f01bb00 is a regular transition (looks the same as 0x5f01fb00). I suspect 0x5f01bc00 needs to be the regular transition and 0x5f01bb00 the double transition. If these are the same in the Euro file, only one of them needs fixing for the Euro version, apparently.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on August 25, 2015, 06:35:33 PM
0x5f01bb00 and 0x5f01bc00 are actually both regular transitions already, I used the Numbering feature in GoFSH to track down the problem texture as 0x5d01bd00, which is now fixed. I've since found about 3 or 4 more texture problems, there are so many possibilities it seems that tracking them down is going to be a bit of a slog.

(http://i991.photobucket.com/albums/af39/MGB204/RTL-Wealthed_zpsf1t0gpad.jpg~original)

Whilst I was about things, I properly wealthed the LHD textures (with grass) too, although this is optional. Hopefully they are all correct now, I may get a chance to look at the other three sets US/EU RHD and US LHD, but they may have to wait for the next version of the NAM.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jimmyson on August 25, 2015, 09:06:50 PM
I don't mean to bring up a 4-day old issue and be all nagging about it. (Probably should have tested the whole feature before reporting)

Returning to the rails...

What's happening with the Y-Split? I can't remember if it had paths before, but they are missing it, or is it scheduled to become a draggable piece?

(https://i.imgur.com/VFUOdePh.png)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 25, 2015, 10:14:09 PM
That one was reported earlier in the thread.  As per the official write-up (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/218), mgb204 fixed it and the files have been committed to our repository for inclusion in the official release of NAM 33.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Jimmyson on August 26, 2015, 08:50:52 AM
The FAR Transition paths for Project Symphony needs redirecting...

(http://i.imgur.com/UilGkBy.png?1)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tommy_CT on August 27, 2015, 01:08:45 AM
I seem to be having this problem with the basic draggable ramps.

(http://i.imgur.com/AqYEohah.jpg)

I also have this problem, among others, which I'll get to shortly.  Based on the video following the quoted post, i thought removing the "Euro Textures" and selecting the "Retuxtured RHW (American Style)" might solve the problem, but alas, no.

Furthermore, when I try to create a new flex/draggable junction, the traffic flow gets all messed up. See the attached image.

I have uninstalled and reinstalled the NAM33PR several times now, trying different options: LHD (as we do in South Africa); RHD; American textures, Euro textures, Irish/South African textures, including and excluding deprecated ramps/transitions.  Just not able to get the RHW to work as intended.

Please help.

Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 27, 2015, 02:05:19 AM
This one's been known from the outset (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/220), and the only way it'll work as intended is with the default RHW texture set.  If you select any of the other "RHW Options" under the "Options for Euro Style Textures" or "Options for American Style Textures" texture options for the RHW, you'll get exactly this issue.  Those sets weren't updated to fit the new standards for the ramp interfaces, and with their developer (MandelSoft) being retired, and no one taking his place as of yet (as previously announced in the RHW development thread), the plan is to shelve those sets for the official NAM 33 release.  (They may be made available again if/when we can find someone able to continue MandelSoft's work.)

In the meanwhile, to ensure we will always have some sort of Euro textures on-hand for new features, I have actually gone through and developed a Euro set in the same style as the default US textures, using batch processing in Photoshop.  That set is, as of yesterday, essentially finished, and if anyone would like to give it an early spin, here is the link (https://www.dropbox.com/s/ihcdnt7kf9rx639/RHW%20EU%20Unified%20Textures-V2.7z?dl=0) (NOW UPDATED as of 8/28/2015).  You'll need 7-Zip (http://www.7-zip.org) to open the file.  There's two folders in there--install just the "0_New EU Standard" folder if you're running an RHD game, and install both the "0_New EU Standard" and "z0_New EU Standard_LeftHandDrive_Support" folders if you're running LHD.  The best place to install them is in the z___NAM folder.

Edit on Aug 27: Also, remember to remove any MandelSoft RHW texture files from the "z___NAM\Road Textures" folder when installing the New EU Standard set.

Additionally, if you are running an RHD game and simply select the "LHD" option (or vice-versa), all you're going to end up with is an RHD game with a screwed up NAM installation--there's a reason why there's the "usually shouldn't be changed" note at the top of the installer list.  The NAM does not change drive side (and never has), and that's a whole separate process.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tommy_CT on August 27, 2015, 03:03:27 AM
Thank you &apls. I will download, install and test in a little while. 

So, just to be clear then (sorry if this is completely noob... it has been YEEEAARRRSS since playing):

What, if any, changes should be selected wit regard to the RHW in custom installation of NAM33PR. I do custom installation so the "Bullet Train" can be included and deprecated connectors/transitions/ramps be excluded.

OR

Shall I do a "Standard" install and then afterwards somehow install the bullet train?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 27, 2015, 03:24:51 AM
You're most welcome. :thumbsup:

With the RHW installation, just make sure you haven't selected any of those "RHW Options" under the alternate texture sets.  Installing the normal Euro set that covers the rest of the NAM won't automatically check the RHW Euro stuff, so you should be safe there.

One thing to note really quick about the Bullet Train Mod--its creator unfortunately wasn't aware we were doing a massive overhaul with the RHW for the same release that the BTM ended up being added to the NAM (NAM 31.0), so the BTM will not cross over RHW networks properly.  It instead reverts to Monorail in those cases.  With the complexity of the BTM network models and props, and the enormous amount of work required to get the BTM to play nice with all of the RHW, it's unlikely that'll be done any time soon (both droric and myself gave it a shot, and gave up aghast at our collective futility).

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tommy_CT on August 27, 2015, 05:17:00 AM
I have re-installed the NAM33PR again...

The flow is as it should be, the textures are close enough (i understand why, thanks), but this is something else:

When i create RH4-L0 and draw a type 1A offramp, it creates it ok. When I then go and add 1 Tile CP pieces to add a "Turning Lane", the 'Overplop' tile will not allow me to plop over the actual junction.

If i plop it next to the highway, the two tiles that makes up the overplop exit seems to break and reverse, with the 'approach' of the junction tile moved to the other side of the 'exit' of the junction tile.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: oortthecloud on August 27, 2015, 06:39:00 AM
I've been having trouble with the hole digger/raiser lots. When I place them, they are invisible, and when I drag a road through them, the game gives me a "cannot place on reserved tile" message. I made sure the terrain was completely flat, and the proper height level, as well as reinstalling NAM; can somebody help?
Thanks.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tommy_CT on August 27, 2015, 02:29:26 PM
(http://imageshack.com/a/img537/238/6eISkR.png)

Hi,

I have come across this peculiarity:  There is a flashing "box" on each tile of my 6 lane highway (L0RHW6). The colour(color) cycles from white to red.

The main highway is RH6S, that is then reduced to RH4 and that in turn is reduced to Avenue, to create the start of the highway.  Automata (cars) goes along the avenue, and the RH4, even the RH4-RH6S transition, but "falls off" the highway at the first RH6S tile.

PS: Is there a better way of 'starting' the highway.. something that will provide the higher capacity right from the start. RH6S does not interface with avenue, so some sort of connector would be involved I presume
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 27, 2015, 03:13:44 PM
I have re-installed the NAM33PR again...

The flow is as it should be, the textures are close enough (i understand why, thanks), but this is something else:

When i create RH4-L0 and draw a type 1A offramp, it creates it ok. When I then go and add 1 Tile CP pieces to add a "Turning Lane", the 'Overplop' tile will not allow me to plop over the actual junction.

If i plop it next to the highway, the two tiles that makes up the overplop exit seems to break and reverse, with the 'approach' of the junction tile moved to the other side of the 'exit' of the junction tile.

The overplop system has always had some difficulties.  We've tried fixing it to no avail.  Also, it appears you still have the MandelSoft Euro textures installed alongside the new Euro textures . . . you'll get a more consistent look if you uninstall the former.

I've been having trouble with the hole digger/raiser lots. When I place them, they are invisible, and when I drag a road through them, the game gives me a "cannot place on reserved tile" message. I made sure the terrain was completely flat, and the proper height level, as well as reinstalling NAM; can somebody help?
Thanks.

There's ones in the NAM that will automatically raise/lower without having to drag a road through them, and will self-destruct after placement.  They're under the Roads menu, and the different heights and depths of raising/digging are selected by TABing through.

I have come across this peculiarity:  There is a flashing "box" on each tile of my 6 lane highway (L0RHW6). The colour(color) cycles from white to red.

There's nothing peculiar about that--it's intentional.  The red paths basically trick the game into raising the capacity of the RHW-6S above the listed catalog capacity, raising it by 25% per tile.

PS: Is there a better way of 'starting' the highway.. something that will provide the higher capacity right from the start. RH6S does not interface with avenue, so some sort of connector would be involved I presume

It actually sounds like you probably have the best solution worked out already.  The only other way you can plug an RHW-6S into a surface street is to use the RD-6 network out of the Network Widening Mod (NWM), which will drag directly into the end of the RHW-6S, and has a slightly higher capacity than Avenue.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 30, 2015, 05:04:35 PM
Getting back to a previous question:

I have two short questions:

1) Will it be possible that there will be diagonal slope transitions and/or diagonal ramps for the rhw in the future? - I think they might be really useful.
2) Is it possible to build a raised curve (L1,L2,L3), like a flexyfly, that changes the level for exeample fron L1 to L0 or L2?

Cheers
Tobsen

Both are already under consideration.  We don't know that any implementation of #2 will actually behave like a FLEXFly at this point, though, due to the complexity.  Neither are going into NAM 33--no idea when either will come to fruition at this point--though #1 is more likely to occur before #2 happens.

Edit: Also getting back to this issue:
The FAR Transition paths for Project Symphony needs redirecting...
(http://i.imgur.com/UilGkBy.png?1)

I've attempted in both RHD and LHD to replicate this particular issue to no avail.  This is what I see with a clean NAM 33 Pre-Release install in LHD mode with that particular piece:

(http://i.imgur.com/tkSwA8l.jpg)

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: roadgeek on August 30, 2015, 07:49:21 PM
I have run into these two issues, and I understand if it is not currently implemented, but I wanted to bring it to your attention, in the event that is is simply an oversight.

Ortho RHW 6S L3 x Diag RHW4
(https://imageshack.com/i/pcB2AQKop)

Diag MIS L4 x Ortho RHW 6S
(https://imageshack.com/i/f0TplrL0p)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 30, 2015, 08:45:55 PM
L3/L4 crossings over other RHWs involving diagonals have been known to be finicky for awhile--that's the main reason we didn't include L3 and L4 FLEXFly this time around.  Those probably won't be fixed until the MetaRUL system is applied to the base RHW networks, which won't be in time for the official NAM 33 release.

The big holdups on the official NAM 33 release right now are ensuring that the new-spec Euro textures are solid, and a bunch of installer script modifications.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Nosimx on August 31, 2015, 02:03:41 AM
Hi,

first of all: thank you for the great improvements coming with NAM 33. I found two issues in the Pre-Release:

- I can drag a B1 ramp on L1, but when I try to convert it to a B2, everything crashed down to L0.

- If I place the L2-L0 180 deg transition "Filler Piece" near a L2 A1 or D1 ramp, the ramp reverts to RHW 2.

Can I mix the Symphony cloverleaf curve with RHW ramps?

Nosimx
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 31, 2015, 02:37:15 AM
Glad you're enjoying the pre-release! :thumbsup:

- I can drag a B1 ramp on L1, but when I try to convert it to a B2, everything crashed down to L0.

There are no L1 (or higher) B2 interfaces.  We haven't made the models yet, and I don't know when they'll be added.

- If I place the L2-L0 180 deg transition "Filler Piece" near a L2 A1 or D1 ramp, the ramp reverts to RHW 2.

There isn't an L2-L0 180 degree transition.  There is an anomalous piece at the end of the Fillers ring, but it's not supposed to be there, and isn't intended for use with L2 networks.

Can I mix the Symphony cloverleaf curve with RHW ramps?

Yes, absolutely.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tommy_CT on August 31, 2015, 03:09:46 AM
Morning Guys,

i have removed and reinstalled NAM33-PR as a standard installation, hoping that it will use the default textures and settings, but there still seem to be a texture problem when I try to make junctions or on/off ramps on RHW:
(http://s24.postimg.org/gg56hbff5/flexfly.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/gg56hbff5/)

There seem to be and alternative texture applied, and I am not sure what it is. i dont think I have *any* other texture mods installed?!?

Eventhough I would like to use Euro textures, as those are more familiar, I would like the network to look right, irrespective of the texture applied.  The automata, afterall, cannot tell or dont mind on which side of the road the yellow line is painted.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Pioneer on August 31, 2015, 08:31:48 AM
I have a problem with the R3 curve. It doesn't fully orient.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 31, 2015, 01:35:46 PM
i have removed and reinstalled NAM33-PR as a standard installation, hoping that it will use the default textures and settings, but there still seem to be a texture problem when I try to make junctions or on/off ramps on RHW:

Check the Plugins\z___NAM\Road Textures folder to see if there's any holdouts in there.  It's odd that that one particular little bit is still remaining.

I have a problem with the R3 curve. It doesn't fully orient.

Already known and has been fixed for the official release. (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/222)

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Teaservid #11, and FlexRamps
Post by: roadgeek on August 31, 2015, 11:05:57 PM
Rampage V.

http://www.youtube.com/v/Pw9aux7Qye0


At 3:04 it shows a funky glitch for the RHW 6S E1 Inside. I noticed the same thing in the pre-release myself.

Dan
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on August 31, 2015, 11:29:03 PM
Those glitches were officially reported, and fortunately, all of them have been fixed for the official release.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on September 01, 2015, 06:41:42 PM
There's been some reports that the pre-release doesn't have the option to install the DDRHW-4 Basic Bridge.  That has definitely been fixed (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/224) in the current installer script for the working release, but in the meanwhile, if you're missing it, you can pick it up here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/zu0a8w09twrf96a/NetworkAddonMod_DDRHW-4_Basic_Bridge.dat?dl=0).  Install it to the Plugins\Network Addon Mod\Additional Bridges\Real Highway Bridges folder.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Rellis92 on September 03, 2015, 05:26:15 PM
Hi guys,

Its late here so I haven't had time to take a proper look through the entire thread so I don't know if this has been reported yet. I came across a missing texture on the RHW4 A1 junction the texture seems to be reverting from the Irish/South African texture (which I have installed) back to the default American textures. It works fine on the B1 junction as you can see. I haven't experimented with any other setups at this time.


Rich
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on September 03, 2015, 06:11:47 PM
First off, Rich, welcome to the SC4D forums!

This one has been known (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/220) since the pre-release became available.  There were some spec changes with overhangs and the like done as part of the ramp improvements in NAM 33, along with a bunch of new additions to that part of the mod, but the developer of all the alternate RHW texture sets (MandelSoft) retired after NAM 32.  He tried to find someone to continue his work, but had no success, and as a result, none of those sets fit the new standards.

There will be a new Euro set based off the width specs of the default US textures, which will be available in the official release of NAM 33.  All of the MandelSoft RHW sets will be discontinued until/unless we can get someone to update them (his non-RHW textures will remain).  I am looking into the possibility of also producing a new Irish/South African set fitting the default specs, but it's a little trickier to pull off than the US-to-EU conversion (which I was able to do largely with Photoshop Action scripts to turn all the yellow stripes to white), so it'll take longer, unfortunately.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tommy_CT on September 07, 2015, 01:42:13 AM
Hi Tarkus and Team NAM

I am not sure how to make the intersection in the image below work.

(http://s28.postimg.org/q9bn0c97t/Intersection.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/q9bn0c97t/)

It is L0-RHW6C and L1-RHW4, using flex height and flex quick changes.

I cant find a 7.5m intersection filler for the MIS.

Also dragging the MIS sections across first then the RHW4 to intersect causes the intersection in 1 lane of the L1-RHW4 to drop to the ground level and the part in the other lane to dissappear.

Going the other way: first dragging the L1-RHW4 fully across, then trying to intersect with the MIS causes the 2 MIS tiles that would have made the intersection to appear on the ground level next to the L0-RHW6C.



Further, it may take a while, but I could possibly try my hand at the texture replacement issues...

 
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: APSMS on September 07, 2015, 02:45:31 AM
Convert the RHW-4 into an avenue before the overpass. Then drag through with the MIS.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on September 07, 2015, 08:26:59 PM
To further add to what APSMS said above, the only elevated RHW networks that support at-grade (same level) intersections are the RHW-2, RHW-3, and MIS, and their support is limited.  The RHW-4 cannot intersect at-grade with the MIS at any height level, even at ground level and the same is true with any wider RHW network.  The L0 RHW-4 x RHW-2 intersection is the only permissible at-grade intersection involving the RHW-4 and another RHW.  MIS ramps are also prevented from intersecting other MIS ramps at-grade, and I also believe there is no support for the RHW-3 x MIS intersections, either (though those stand a chance of being made later).

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on September 09, 2015, 04:43:27 PM
Do you mean MISxMIS and MISxRHW-3 or just the latter?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: dyoungyn on September 09, 2015, 06:20:07 PM
NAM Team,

Something of a new topic IRT NAM 33 Pre-Release and that is a downloadable/printable guide with all the different draggable ramps and their capabilities i.e. levels.

This is more a wish list as I just cannot keep up and figure out/remember the different ramps. 

dyoungyn
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Indiana Joe on September 09, 2015, 06:59:57 PM
NAM Team,

Something of a new topic IRT NAM 33 Pre-Release and that is a downloadable/printable guide with all the different draggable ramps and their capabilities i.e. levels.

This is more a wish list as I just cannot keep up and figure out/remember the different ramps. 

dyoungyn

It was made by woodb3kmaster and posted back on page 3:

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54771042/dri-table.png)
(Click for full resolution.)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on September 09, 2015, 08:11:30 PM
Do you mean MISxMIS and MISxRHW-3 or just the latter?

Just the latter.  Aside from the volleyball pieces, there are no plans for MISxMIS.  MISxRHW-3 will probably happen once the RHW-3 undergoes upgrades in the near future.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: dyoungyn on September 09, 2015, 09:04:14 PM
Tarkus/woodb3kmaster,

Thank you so much and just what I was looking for.   Now I just have to learn all the different ramp type names to get the one I am looking for. 

dyoungyn
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Wiimeiser on September 10, 2015, 08:58:45 AM
Do you mean MISxMIS and MISxRHW-3 or just the latter?

Just the latter.  Aside from the volleyball pieces, there are no plans for MISxMIS.  MISxRHW-3 will probably happen once the RHW-3 undergoes upgrades in the near future.

-Alex
So does this mean there'll be MIS versions of the volleyball pieces or are you just referring to the existing ones?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: jdenm8 on September 10, 2015, 09:41:01 AM
I never planned to make any, no.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: LReyomeXX on September 10, 2015, 12:09:42 PM
Sorry to find out that all my posts on the github were a waste of time, so I deleted my account for this one reason

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9263825/4290746.jpg)

Except for Titanicbuff

This is not the place for personal attacks. -Tarkus (Admin)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: prodenborn on September 11, 2015, 09:04:11 AM
I cannot seem to get the multi radius curve, version R3, to rotate into certain orientations. The orientations shown below are the only ones that are available to me.

Apologies if this should be posted somewhere else or if this has already been addressed.

(http://i.imgur.com/HsleyF1.jpg)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on September 11, 2015, 02:02:45 PM
Yes, that one was reported awhile ago, and fortunately, it's been fixed on our end in preparation for the finalized NAM 33 release.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on September 12, 2015, 11:49:20 PM
Hey look another bug:
(http://i.imgur.com/hCwCVXz.jpg)

I'm not sure if this has been reported yet, but when you drag a diagonal L2 RHW-4 across a series of L1 RHWs, the dashed lane markings are missing, something that could cause a bit of confusion among sims all around the SimWorld. $%Grinno$% Luckily the paths are all there.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: titanicbuff on September 12, 2015, 11:52:40 PM
hmm- I haven't seen that one- interesting.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on September 13, 2015, 12:29:57 AM
Likely a UV mapping issue.  Being strictly cosmetic, I wouldn't say it's a high priority, though I will take a look at it.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Sabretooth78 on September 27, 2015, 02:08:04 PM
Cross-posting this one from over at Simtropolis:

I'm wondering if anybody else has encountered this odd STR issue:

(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y406/sargeantcm/Simtropolis/STR001.png)

I can't seem to get a properly textured STR-Road intersection to work with the road in an east-west alignment and the STR running northeast to southwest.  When I place a starter next to the road, I can get the texturing to appear correctly, but one of the rail tiles adjacent to the road loses its pathing.  If I click on the rail tile 1 removed from the intersection (i.e. adjacent to the road but not the intersection) on the opposite side of the "dead" tile, it'll bring the pathing back but lose the intersection texture (it goes back to DTR).  If I click on the tile next to that, it'll fix the textures and break the pathing.  I can basically toggle this back and forth this way.  The side of the road that the starter is placed on seems to be irrelevant.  Both ends of each rail are stabilized by starters some distance away from the road in addition to the "experimental" starters at the road.

I don't get this problem with any diagonals crossing north-south roads or east-west roads crossing southeast-northwest diagonal rails.  I haven't done much testing with this on diagonal vs. diagonal intersections but I've gotten it to occur on some of those as well.

Some of the other STR intersections can be a bit fussy but in general I've managed to get them to work (not always knowing what I'm doing, unfortunately).  I'm not sure if this is one of those features that just needs a good overall QC...
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: rivit on September 27, 2015, 07:46:01 PM
In a late addition to Rail bugs, I was approached by a young kiwi player to fix a number of STR textures for Standard Rail that had stopped working with RUM and the NAM33 pre release. It seems that there has been a cleanup/consolidation of RULs in 90/45 curves and switches necessitating new FSH. Those have been done and I will issue an addendum to RUM in due course.

 Along the way the new FARR DTRxSTR piece has also been added but this has a graphical glitch that does not feature in its DTR equivalent or Road crossing. Pieces 5313Axxx are the ones affected.   
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: indovote on October 03, 2015, 02:00:45 AM
Hello Tarkus/NAM Team,

Can you port NAM to SimCity 2013? Because if NAM has ported to SimCity 2013, it can use more features (such as ease of elevation).

Sorry for bad english, because I'am not native english speaker.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 03, 2015, 03:08:49 AM
indovote, first off, welcome to SC4D! 

To answer your question, it's impossible to port a SimCity 4 mod like the NAM over to SimCity 2013.  The game's mechanics, software architecture, and graphical engine are completely different, and absolutely nothing can be transferred.  They're completely different animals.  Additionally, hardly anyone on the team even owns SC2013 (I don't), and those who have it haven't touched it since shortly after its release.  In case you're wondering, it's the same thing with Cities: Skylines and Cities XL/XXL.  In spite of its age, there's still a lot more that can be done with SC4, and that's the direction the NAM Team is headed.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on October 03, 2015, 05:30:21 PM
This isn't really a bug or anything, but I noticed that the description for the width transition between RHW-6C and -8C says it's deprecated. This doesn't seem to be correct; I have no clue what this would have been replaced with.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: GMT on October 05, 2015, 07:40:52 AM
can we get puzzle pieces back pretty pleeeaaase?
these draggables are driving me nuts for they don't do what I want. Same for flex btw, hours of fiddling around to get a single interchange...
oh, and I end up with really really funny aka bugged looks:
(http://i.imgur.com/w62CjHk.jpg)

I know it's just a pre-release like a beta or something but still rolling back to 32 now
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on October 05, 2015, 11:04:29 AM
The puzzle pieces can still be used; they're just marked as deprecated. Also, I think part of the wonkiness with the textures is the fact that you're using Ontario textures, which don't really work anymore because MandelSoft has retired from SC4 modding and couldn't find anyone else to take over for him. So you'll have to switch back to the default textures.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 05, 2015, 11:42:25 AM
As compdude mentioned, once you switch back to the default textures, you'll find the draggables work much better.  The Ontario set won't be included as part of the official release of NAM 33, and ditto with MandelSoft's Euro and Irish/South African sets.  They're shelved until we can find someone who can take over maintenance--there's different scaling to them, and they're put together differently.  There will be a new Euro set based off the default that will be in NAM 33 (generated from the US default using Photoshop scripts), so at least that will be covered. 

Puzzle pieces are going the way of the dodo in large part because people complained that there were too many, and simultaneously requested new features.  The existing ones will stick around in legacy form, but they're no longer supported, and almost all new functionality will be fully FLEX/draggable-based.

Additionally, NAM 33's Pre-Release also fixes a number of issues with NAM 32, so it's actually a more stable release.

This isn't really a bug or anything, but I noticed that the description for the width transition between RHW-6C and -8C says it's deprecated. This doesn't seem to be correct; I have no clue what this would have been replaced with.

That was likely a slip-up on my part.  That transition has an IID that makes it look like a ramp interface, so when quickly going through and marking everything, that one was accidentally marked that way.  It will be deprecated by NAM 34, however, as the width transitions are the next area to receive the FLEX/draggable treatment.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Nadlug on October 05, 2015, 07:03:59 PM
Getting a lot of pollution caused by Tram (possibly all Elevated rail traffic)

Screenshot of the Air pollution data view with the routing tool showing traffic at a T Intersection.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=530532692

Not sure if this is a bug or not. Seems kinda strange for (I assume) electric trains to cause so much pollution.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 05, 2015, 07:25:47 PM
It's partly due to an issue with the game.  The property that has to be switched on to allow for proper counting of traffic on El-Rail and Monorail networks automatically causes the game to create a pollution effect from that traffic as well.  The NAM's Traffic Simulator Plugins include a modified version of the game's default Clean Air Act to counteract this--you'll need to enact that ordinance in-game to achieve the desired effect.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Nadlug on October 05, 2015, 09:33:15 PM
The NAM's Traffic Simulator Plugins include a modified version of the game's default Clean Air Act to counteract this--you'll need to enact that ordinance in-game to achieve the desired effect.

-Alex

Thanks that cleared up most of it though there is still some pollution present. My other city's have similar pollution hot spots over tram lines though they have more car traffic as well.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: drjumbajookiba on October 07, 2015, 08:10:29 PM
Here I found this bug:
(http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h65/stitchisfluffy/Error_zpskh4au7ds.png)

Help?????? ()what() ()what()
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: indovote on October 07, 2015, 10:22:22 PM
Dear Tarkus/NAM Team,

Can you add the Indonesia Road Texture? Because I want more road texture added to the NAM.
Also, can you fix "CTD on connecting high-rail directly to station" bug?

Sorry for bad english, because I'am from Indonesia & I'am not native English speaker.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: APSMS on October 07, 2015, 10:55:57 PM
Here I found this bug:
<bug picture>

Help?????? ()what() ()what()
Did you try randomly clicking with the RHW tool around the problem area? (click on the RHW networks you already drew) Sometimes the network RULs (rules) aren't figured out when you first draw the network, and clicking forces the game to reevaluate the connections and networks in the surrounding area.

Dear Tarkus/NAM Team,

Can you add the Indonesia Road Texture? Because I want more road texture added to the NAM.
Also, can you fix "CTD on connecting high-rail directly to station" bug?

Sorry for bad english, because I'am from Indonesia & I'am not native English speaker.
At the moment texture mods are on a temporary hiatus. Efforts are being made to make a basic Euro Texture version, but because the main Euro Texture Developer for the NAM (Mandelsoft) is no longer active, all of his mods have been relegated to legacy status, and are no longer 100% compatible with the new features in the most recent NAM.

Form follows function is also the policy of the NAM, so texture mods are not a priority. The two offerings (US/Canada & Euro) are going to be all for the foreseeable future. Unfortunately the best advice for additional texture mods at this time is to make one yourself, as many of the NAM Team members are strapped for time as it is (due to Real Life).

For the CTD you are having, is that for normal Heavy Rail (Freight and Passenger), or for El-Rail? If it's for Heavy Rail, nothing can be done. This is a known issue involving TE-lots (like the station) and Puzzle Pieces (which is what the Elevated Heavy Rail consists of). Hovering a puzzle-piece over a TE-LOT like a station will cause a CTD (but the reverse, a TE-LOT over a PP, doesn't do this)

If it's any consolation, NAM 34 will bring many improvements to the rail networks, maybe* including draggable Elevated Heavy Rail, which won't have this issue. For now you will just have to be very careful with how you place your heavy rail next to your transit stations. As a temporary workaround, notice that there is no CTD if you place the rails first, and then plop the station afterward.

*big emphasis on the maybe
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: indovote on October 07, 2015, 11:04:12 PM
Here I found this bug:
<bug picture>

Help?????? ()what() ()what()
Did you try randomly clicking with the RHW tool around the problem area? (click on the RHW networks you already drew) Sometimes the network RULs (rules) aren't figured out when you first draw the network, and clicking forces the game to reevaluate the connections and networks in the surrounding area.

Dear Tarkus/NAM Team,

Can you add the Indonesia Road Texture? Because I want more road texture added to the NAM.
Also, can you fix "CTD on connecting high-rail directly to station" bug?

Sorry for bad english, because I'am from Indonesia & I'am not native English speaker.
At the moment texture mods are on a temporary hiatus. Efforts are being made to make a basic Euro Texture version, but because the main Euro Texture Developer for the NAM (Mandelsoft) is no longer active, all of his mods have been relegated to legacy status, and are no longer 100% compatible with the new features in the most recent NAM.

Form follows function is also the policy of the NAM, so texture mods are not a priority. The two offerings (US/Canada & Euro) are going to be all for the foreseeable future. Unfortunately the best advice for additional texture mods at this time is to make one yourself, as many of the NAM Team members are strapped for time as it is (due to Real Life).

For the CTD you are having, is that for normal Heavy Rail (Freight and Passenger), or for El-Rail? If it's for Heavy Rail, nothing can be done. This is a known issue involving TE-lots (like the station) and Puzzle Pieces (which is what the Elevated Heavy Rail consists of). Hovering a puzzle-piece over a TE-LOT like a station will cause a CTD (but the reverse, a TE-LOT over a PP, doesn't do this)

If it's any consolation, NAM 34 will bring many improvements to the rail networks, maybe* including draggable Elevated Heavy Rail, which won't have this issue. For now you will just have to be very careful with how you place your heavy rail next to your transit stations. As a temporary workaround, notice that there is no CTD if you place the rails first, and then plop the station afterward.

*big emphasis on the maybe
High-rail is meant here is double height El-Rail. :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on October 07, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Here I found this bug:
Help?????? ()what() ()what()

The 3 tile networks will have that issue until the RHW Base RUL2 Code is fixed up. So in the meantime I would stick to mainly single tile networks at lower levels for stability.



As for alternative texture sets there will be limited varieties going forward!

Textures can be labor intensive require quite an amount of skill to create, especially when intersections come into play!

So you will have to bear with us while we get NAM33 for prime time. There are a limited amount of contributors to the NAM these days so the shift is from large changes to smaller and more focused changes. I hope this will clear up the situation regarding the NAM and future developments.

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 08, 2015, 02:35:09 PM
Can you add the Indonesia Road Texture? Because I want more road texture added to the NAM.

Also, can you fix "CTD on connecting high-rail directly to station" bug?

With the 30m High El-Rail station it is a little bit fiddly, since you can't plop a station in a gap of 4 tiles left for it (no paths). Therefore you must be very careful, because if one of the puzzle pieces (High El-Rail) touches the station lot, indeed you will get a CTD. This issue is a problem that exists from Maxis and the NAM team are not really in a position to fix it directly. Essentially, placing any Puzzle Piece over a Transit Enabled lot (such as a station) with the same network as the puzzle piece causes this to occur. Some stations have been modified to prevent the issue from occurring, I'm not sure if this can be done with this station however.

Thankfully most users won't be making too many 30m stations so it's a minor thing, with care you can work around the problem:

1 - Make sure you always save your city before attempting to connect one.
2 - First build the El-Rail network leaving a 6 tile gap.
3 - Plop the station in the middle of the gap.
4 - Being very careful with where you place the cursor (mouse), plop the last two pieces that connect to the station.

Provided you never touch the station with the puzzle pieces, all will be fine.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: vicman on October 09, 2015, 04:24:53 PM
Hello!

I have a problem. I can't install NAM, it show this message.

The message say that require the version 1.638.0. But the patch is already installed.

Then I don't know to do, I need help.

Thanks  :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 09, 2015, 05:25:38 PM
I have a problem. I can't install NAM, it show this message.

The message say that require the version 1.638.0. But the patch is already installed.

Where did you get your copy of SC4? Are you running the disk-based version or did it come from a digital download? If digital can you state which vendor it was purchased from please.

Additionally be aware the NAM will only work with SC4 + the Rush Hour add-on which is also included in deluxe versions of the game.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: vicman on October 12, 2015, 01:50:34 PM
I have a problem. I can't install NAM, it show this message.

The message say that require the version 1.638.0. But the patch is already installed.

Where did you get your copy of SC4? Are you running the disk-based version or did it come from a digital download? If digital can you state which vendor it was purchased from please.

Additionally be aware the NAM will only work with SC4 + the Rush Hour add-on which is also included in deluxe versions of the game.

I am running a disk-based version. I have the deluxe edition. I run the patch but the "SimCity 4.exe" do not update, its version is 1.1.610.0. After of run the patch to update SKU1, it copy the files .dat, but the version is the same.

I don't know if I am doing something wrong.

Thanks for your reply
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 12, 2015, 03:18:41 PM
There are different versions of the EP1 update, you must install the correct one for your game's region (named SKU 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5). If you install the wrong update, it simply won't work. You may unknowingly have one of the other regions and not SKU1. To check this, go to "Program Files (x86)/Maxis/SimCity 4 Deluxe" (note this is the default installation path for 64-bit Windows). Open the "Sku_Data" folder. Inside, you should find a subfolder stating your SKU version number - in the first instance match this to the EP1 update you are patching with.

If this is SKU1, then perhaps you need to consider uninstalling and re-installing SC4. It is best practise to patch the game on a fresh install. Assuming all goes well, you might want to consider a second update from Maxis to version 1.640.0 - without it any custom content will be unable to show nitelights.

Note also, using any sort of modified .exe will cause the patch to fail, this includes no-CD cracks or pirated versions of the game.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Moonraker0 on October 14, 2015, 10:29:17 AM
Hi, sorry if this was reported already but I couldn't find it on the bug tracker (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues).  It seems like diagonal RD-4 no longer works properly:  see screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535041156).
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on October 14, 2015, 02:21:03 PM
I think you might be putting the roads too close together. Try separating them by one tile on the diagonal portion. This is no different than what you'd have to do to get a diagonal 2-tile RHW network.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on October 14, 2015, 02:45:33 PM
Hi, sorry if this was reported already but I couldn't find it on the bug tracker (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues).  It seems like diagonal RD-4 no longer works properly:  see screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535041156).

I think it is fixed on our end! Yep, you are suppose to draw that out like that.

If it surfaces again we will investigate.

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 14, 2015, 05:36:54 PM
The RD-4 diagonals and OWR-4 diagonals actually have an Avenue-like shared-tile footprint, rather than split-tile footprint like the RHW networks.  I have replicated Moonraker's issue with both the RD-4 and the OWR-4 with my current build, though I'm at a complete loss for why it's happening.  Absolutely nothing was changed with the NWM.  The textures for the part of the orth-diag transition that lines up with the shared tile even seems to be failing to appear.  Bizarre.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: cogeo on October 14, 2015, 06:18:00 PM
Hi, I have a question here, what does the controller compiler remove from the RULs? It is supposed to create a smaller RUL table. I chose to not install the RHW and NWM, and remove much of the rest draggable content (Draggable Elevated Road Networks, Draggable FANs) and not include the RRW and BTM mods either, and the filesize of the controller is still 67 MBs? Any idea?

I would also like to report that the installer is quite stressful to use, if you perform a custom installation:
- The Options window is too small, you always wonder if you missed or forgot something, or clicked accidentally somewhere else, so you have to go up and down and open and close the selections all the time, just to make sure.
- Clicking on the Setup Type Combo above, or in the Separate RULs and networks option loses all your work so far (selections) and there is no way to restore it (you have to start over).

And why does it uninstall my SemitransparentTrainStations_Lots.dat file? It's not included in the list of stations it installs. Is it buggy or something? Please remove it from the Cleanitol list.

EDIT:
For you info, just run my own parser/filter little program, and here's what it reported:

Code: [Select]
Line Count   : 1110941
Blank Lines  : 53
Comment Lines: 107
Section Lines: 1
Rule Lines   : 1110780

0x57?????? Rules: 1009348
0x51?????? Rules: 32150

So yes, there is a lot of RHW and NWM content in there, which is the bulk of the controller's size. So what does the compiler really remove?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on October 14, 2015, 06:54:39 PM
The RD-4 diagonals and OWR-4 diagonals actually have an Avenue-like shared-tile footprint, rather than split-tile footprint like the RHW networks.  I have replicated Moonraker's issue with both the RD-4 and the OWR-4 with my current build, though I'm at a complete loss for why it's happening.  Absolutely nothing was changed with the NWM.  The textures for the part of the orth-diag transition that lines up with the shared tile even seems to be failing to appear.  Bizarre.

-Alex

I think something or someone has made some errors in the INRULs on GitHub  ???

I tested it without the Draggable FAR INRULs and it worked fine and I know some of the INRULs for the RRW have been messed up for the crossings (IID wise). I would take note of the changes and see if there are any errors there.

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 14, 2015, 06:57:55 PM
If the controller is showing up at 67MB, then you're getting the full controller.  There's been an inexplicable issue with the Controller Compiler sometimes having an issue reading its XML file (official bug report here (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/243)), and the failsafe state when there's compiler issues is to install the full controller.  The XML issue seems to go away upon running the compiler a second time, so you may be able to run it manually to fix that in the interim and get the filesize down.

As far as the other installer issues and the Cleanitol situation, Steve would know more.


I think something or someone has made some errors in the INRULs on GitHub  ???

I tested it without the Draggable FAR INRULs and it worked fine and I know some of the INRULs for the RRW have been messed up for the crossings (IID wise). I would take note of the changes and see if there are any errors there.

Thanks for checking that, Stephen--when I first saw the report and replicated it, INRUL fishiness was the one suspicion I had.  The question is finding out when the problematic changes occurred.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on October 14, 2015, 10:02:36 PM
Hi, sorry if this was reported already but I couldn't find it on the bug tracker (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues).  It seems like diagonal RD-4 no longer works properly:  see screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535041156).

Thanks for the report Moonraker0  :thumbsup:

I have fixed the issue on our end I think and have attached the correct INRUL for you to use in the meantime!

Thanks again!

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 14, 2015, 10:22:50 PM
And why does it uninstall my SemitransparentTrainStations_Lots.dat file? It's not included in the list of stations it installs. Is it buggy or something? Please remove it from the Cleanitol list.

I'd hazard a guess this was connected with the SLUP program to update TE lots to modern NAM standards. Having a quick look at my files, I updated the TE Entry Cost and Capacity of your lots. Given they were released a while back they are a little out of sync with current standards. I'm guessing that's why the SLUP removes them.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: vicman on October 14, 2015, 11:27:19 PM
There are different versions of the EP1 update, you must install the correct one for your game's region (named SKU 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5). If you install the wrong update, it simply won't work. You may unknowingly have one of the other regions and not SKU1. To check this, go to "Program Files (x86)/Maxis/SimCity 4 Deluxe" (note this is the default installation path for 64-bit Windows). Open the "Sku_Data" folder. Inside, you should find a subfolder stating your SKU version number - in the first instance match this to the EP1 update you are patching with.
If this is SKU1, then perhaps you need to consider uninstalling and re-installing SC4. It is best practise to patch the game on a fresh install. Assuming all goes well, you might want to consider a second update from Maxis to version 1.640.0 - without it any custom content will be unable to show nitelights.
Note also, using any sort of modified .exe will cause the patch to fail, this includes no-CD cracks or pirated versions of the game.


I will try re-install. I run the nam version beta 17 jun 2005, that run correctly, I copied some files .dat in the folder "Plugins"

Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 15, 2015, 01:36:58 AM
Do you mean you were running version beta 17 or is that what you are trying to install? Right now we're really only able to provide support for the latest version of the NAM, which is the 33 Pre Release and perhaps version 32 as well.

If the 638 patch runs, it will always state "run successfully" at the end of the process. This doesn't mean the patch applied correctly, it just means the application itself ran to it's conclusion. When you run a SC4 patch, a file "sc4_patchlog.txt" is created in the same folder where the update exists. Please check this file and copy the contents here and I should be able to diagnose the exact nature of your problem.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: cogeo on October 15, 2015, 03:30:14 AM
The XML issue seems to go away upon running the compiler a second time, so you may be able to run it manually to fix that in the interim and get the filesize down.
Ok thx, but where can I get the XML and the compiler from? The XML is created and then deleted on the fly I guess, isn't it?

I'd hazard a guess this was connected with the SLUP program to update TE lots to modern NAM standards. Having a quick look at my files, I updated the TE Entry Cost and Capacity of your lots. Given they were released a while back they are a little out of sync with current standards. I'm guessing that's why the SLUP removes them.

Maybe, but still, the NAM installer does not install the updated ones, just removes the previous version. Players who are using them will have them simply removed. And won't be offered some download link, they are nor even notified (unless they are curious enough to check the Cleanitol log). Is this OK?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Moonraker0 on October 15, 2015, 06:03:33 AM
Hi, sorry if this was reported already but I couldn't find it on the bug tracker (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues).  It seems like diagonal RD-4 no longer works properly:  see screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535041156).

Thanks for the report Moonraker0  :thumbsup:

I have fixed the issue on our end I think and have attached the correct INRUL for you to use in the meantime!

Thanks again!

-eggman121
Thanks for the replies, everyone, and thank you for the fix, eggman121.  This will be good to have in the meantime before the next NAM update!  Glad you were able to figure out the cause of the problem.

EDIT:  Unfortunately, I am still having problems with this.  The problem is not as bad and works for north-south RD-4, but east-west RD-4 has some de-converted road tiles still:  screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535461217), screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535461681)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 15, 2015, 11:51:48 AM
Maybe, but still, the NAM installer does not install the updated ones, just removes the previous version. Players who are using them will have them simply removed. And won't be offered some download link, they are nor even notified (unless they are curious enough to check the Cleanitol log). Is this OK?

I think the problem is that the code is merely searching for those lots it's finds with unsuitable transit switches. I have the feeling that process is done from a master-list rather than a real-time scan but someone handling SLURP would know a lot more about it than I. Where updated lots were created by the SLURP team this process will update the users files as appropriate. Where such lots have yet to be made, I believe it simply removes the old lots. The rationale behind this comes from a new understanding of how the Transit Switch: Entry Cost & Capacity properties function. There is a bug that can cause major problems if a station gets to around 4x it's capacity causing the entire transport network of it's type to cease to function. The NAM team had to make a decision to either move forward with this knowledge, potentially at the loss of all custom modded stations that were not updated as a result. Whilst the SLUP program is our attempt at updating old stations, we simply can't re-do them all.

Given your knowledge in this sphere, it should be a doddle for you to update these stations with the values here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=12522.0). I'm sure we could then integrate these files into the NAM installer as part of SLURP in the future.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: titanicbuff on October 16, 2015, 05:54:13 PM
sorry or the long pause in posting- been playing a lot of skylines lately while waiting on the final release. So I thought I'd check in.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on October 16, 2015, 08:51:36 PM
Thanks for the report! I think some of the INRULs may be erronous in those directions. Thanks for finding that out. Will fix tonight when I finish work.

-eggman121 (sent from mobile)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: cogeo on October 17, 2015, 02:32:11 AM
When is this about to be released?

I'm almost done with adding T21s for Tram-in-road and Tram-in/on-street puzzle pieces (stoplights on intersections. streetlights on the rest) and I wonder if there is time to include them into this version of NAM. Discussion (really looong ago) here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=4089.msg395912#msg395912). Most of the work was already done by then, but stopped working on it.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: cogeo on October 17, 2015, 04:45:04 AM
Btw who changed the Roads RULes in NetworkAddonMod_IndividualNetworkRULs.dat (IID 0x00000007)?

It flips the T21s for the NORMAL SC4 ROADS! This file wasn't there in the previous NAM releases and I don't know what it does. But causes me big troubles, as the whole layout is flipped, and I have to review all of my work - and revise much of it. It's definitely wrong, as first, it's not "symmetrical" (flips the network only in the horizontal direction) and second, the (new) layout differs from that on streets. In the previous NAM version, as well as the Maxis version they were identical.

Checked, and removing the last few lines (after the ";Added by Tarkus" comment doesn't help.
Changing the RUL in line 331 from 3,0,0x00004B00,1,0 to the original 3,0,0x00004B00,3,0 alone appears to "fix" the problem, but I don't know if this OK, it's definitely not complete, and I don't know what else has to be changed, so this should be done by the member who made the change, to do it properly. It's not consistent as is, so this needs to be fixed.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on October 17, 2015, 05:36:41 AM
EDIT:  Unfortunately, I am still having problems with this.  The problem is not as bad and works for north-south RD-4, but east-west RD-4 has some de-converted road tiles still:  screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535461217), screenshot (http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=535461681)

It has completely escaped me that I forgot to arrange the flips to the correct orientations  :-[ , Anyway here is a new file to try attached to this post!

Oh and +1 for your help  :thumbsup: .

Kind Regards



Btw who changed the Roads RULes in NetworkAddonMod_IndividualNetworkRULs.dat (IID 0x00000007)?

It flips the T21s for the NORMAL SC4 ROADS! This file wasn't there in the previous NAM releases and I don't know what it does. But causes me big troubles, as the whole layout is flipped, and I have to review all of my work - and revise much of it. It's definitely wrong, as first, it's not "symmetrical" (flips the network only in the horizontal direction) and second, the (new) layout differs from that on streets. In the previous NAM version, as well as the Maxis version they were identical.

Checked, and removing the last few lines (after the ";Added by Tarkus" comment doesn't help.
Changing the RUL in line 331 from 3,0,0x00004B00,1,0 to the original 3,0,0x00004B00,3,0 alone appears to "fix" the problem, but I don't know if this OK, it's definitely not complete, and I don't know what else has to be changed, so this should be done by the member who made the change, to do it properly. It's not consistent as is, so this needs to be fixed.

I think in general that the INRULs have been mucked up somehow. I think we need to go through with a fine tooth comb to find out what has differentiated and what needs to be fixed.

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: cogeo on October 17, 2015, 12:28:17 PM
I think in general that the INRULs have been mucked up somehow. I think we need to go through with a fine tooth comb to find out what has differentiated and what needs to be fixed.
For the issue I have reported, that fine-combing is not even necessary, as I have found and described the problem already. The changes (from the original) are very few anyways, All that needs to be done is the member who made the changes modify those few lines as needed.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eclipticalstorm on October 17, 2015, 01:29:43 PM
The Ped Mall textures are missing under the E-rail over Ped Mall pieces.  This has been an issue since the last few NAM Updates (aprox. NAM 30+).  At first I thought the piece may no longer be supported, but I noticed it's still in the que ribbon so I figured maybe it was just something that slipped through the cracks.  Thanks in advance!

(http://i1379.photobucket.com/albums/ah149/Eclipticalstorm/Railyard%20Test-May.%205%209711444594304_zps9eumwxut.jpg)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 17, 2015, 04:01:29 PM
The Ped Mall textures are missing under the E-rail over Ped Mall pieces.  This has been an issue since the last few NAM Updates (aprox. NAM 30+).  At first I thought the piece may no longer be supported, but I noticed it's still in the que ribbon so I figured maybe it was just something that slipped through the cracks.  Thanks in advance!

I've just tested all of the El-Rail-over-Pedmall pieces, and none of them were missing any textures.  Judging by the looks of your El-Rail, however, it looks like you're using some sort of cosmetic mod on your El-Rail, which is likely the culprit.

Regarding the Road INRULs, I think Stephen's "fine tooth comb" comment is to make sure there aren't any more oddities had been introduced.  I do know what the "added by Tarkus" bit is (it's an INRUL trigger for the Draggable Road Viaduct OnSlope transition), but beyond that, there is surprisingly little information about why, when, or by whom the changes were made, because the way we build those files changed with the introduction of the INRUL Compiler back in April (which would have been the time that INRUL-07 started being included in NetworkAddonMod_IndividualNetworkRULs.dat).  In any case, any member of the team who has signed up for access can edit that Github depository, so it doesn't require playing an unproductive blame game.  We will need to make sure that reverting it won't break something else, though.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 17, 2015, 06:49:25 PM
The Ped Mall textures are missing under the E-rail over Ped Mall pieces.  This has been an issue since the last few NAM Updates (aprox. NAM 30+).  At first I thought the piece may no longer be supported, but I noticed it's still in the que ribbon so I figured maybe it was just something that slipped through the cracks.  Thanks in advance!

I've just tested all of the El-Rail-over-Pedmall pieces, and none of them were missing any textures.  Judging by the looks of your El-Rail, however, it looks like you're using some sort of cosmetic mod on your El-Rail, which is likely the culprit.

Yeah, I checked my game earlier and had no troubles either, although I'm running a heavily modified setup so I wasn't sure the results could be trusted.

Now Alex mentions it, the pillars do not look like default El-Rail at all. If you can let me know what mod you are using, it can most likely be fixed with a simple texture.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eclipticalstorm on October 19, 2015, 06:30:51 PM
Thanks for the follow-up Tarkus and mgb204.  It took me a while to figure out which mod I could have installed that would have changed the El-Rail pylons.  After a lot of digging it turns out the culprit was the ELR_Catenary_Mod.  This mod isn't compatible with the El-Rail Facelift mod (adds textures underneath the El-Rail) which might explain why it is clashing with the NAM Ped Mall. If you guys are able to make a patch let me know.  In the mean time I'll remove the mod.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 19, 2015, 10:56:40 PM
Thanks for the follow-up Tarkus and mgb204.  It took me a while to figure out which mod I could have installed that would have changed the El-Rail pylons.  After a lot of digging it turns out the culprit was the ELR_Catenary_Mod.  This mod isn't compatible with the El-Rail Facelift mod (adds textures underneath the El-Rail) which might explain why it is clashing with the NAM Ped Mall. If you guys are able to make a patch let me know.  In the mean time I'll remove the mod.

When you run the NAM installer, the Alternate El-Rail facelift has options to install catenaries, I'd use those instead as they are tailored for MLs mod.

Any "patching" of 3rd party mods would not be made official. In this case it looks like the pedmall textures have changed ID's and that has prevented them from showing. Given the likelihood of the creator updating the mod is low, I've simply remapped an additional set of textures to the old IDs (attached). However updating the mod is something the creator would have to do.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: vicman on October 23, 2015, 07:42:46 PM
Do you mean you were running version beta 17 or is that what you are trying to install? Right now we're really only able to provide support for the latest version of the NAM, which is the 33 Pre Release and perhaps version 32 as well.

If the 638 patch runs, it will always state "run successfully" at the end of the process. This doesn't mean the patch applied correctly, it just means the application itself ran to it's conclusion. When you run a SC4 patch, a file "sc4_patchlog.txt" is created in the same folder where the update exists. Please check this file and copy the contents here and I should be able to diagnose the exact nature of your problem.


I were running the nam beta.

This is the content of that file:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   PATCH  Version 6.50 - RTPatch(R) Professional - Software Update System
                    DOS/16-bit Windows/32-bit Windows Edition
       (C) Copyright Pocket Soft, Inc., 1991-2002.  All Rights Reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----- Processing Patch File -----
Applying MODIFY File Patch for 'DELUXE.exe'
Applying MODIFY File Patch for 'Graphics Rules.sgr'
    New Version of File 'Graphics Rules.sgr' already exists.
Applying MODIFY File Patch for 'RUSHHOUR.exe'
Applying MODIFY File Patch for 'SimCity_1.dat'
warning wpt0036: Old File not found. However, a file of the same name was
               found. No update done since file contents do not match.
Applying MODIFY File Patch for 'SimCity_2.dat'
    New Version of File 'SimCity_2.dat' already exists.
Applying MODIFY File Patch for 'SimCity_3.dat'
    New Version of File 'SimCity_3.dat' already exists.
Applying MODIFY File Patch for 'SimCity_4.dat'
    New Version of File 'SimCity_4.dat' already exists.
----- Patch File Processing Complete -----
-----------------------------------------------------
-        Results of Application of Patch File       -
-----------------------------------------------------
File Patches Applied ......................... (   0)

   Files Modified .................. (   0)
   Files Renamed. .................. (   0)
   Files Added ..................... (   0)
   Files Deleted ................... (   0)

   Temporary Files Processed........ (   0)

File Patches Skipped: New Files Up-To-Date.... (   4)

File Patches Ignored: Old Files Missing....... (   0)

                      Old Files Invalid....... (   3)
-----------------------------------------------------
Total File Patches Processed ................. (   7)
-----------------------------------------------------


There is a warning. There are somes invalid files.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on October 24, 2015, 02:21:25 AM
So contrary to what the installer says, it's actually not installed any of the patch files. This is because when it looks at the original files, they have been modified so the installer refuses to update them. The only solution here is to uninstall SC4 completely then re-install it. Before doing anything else you need to run the EP1 patch, I'd also recommend installing the second 640 patch which add nitelights for custom buildings at this point.

Looking at the files where it failed, Simcity_1.DAT and Graphics Rules.sgr I would take a guess that you updated these files at some point. Probably to install the I-HT fix and get your GPU working correctly. You need to remember to also re-install those fixes after the patches have been applied.

If the patch fails on a brand new install of SC4 then that would suggest to me that your SC4 install media is not genuine.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on October 27, 2015, 02:14:21 PM
Not sure if this was reported already, but the RHW-8S D1 Inside ramp has a texture error on one of the tiles:
(http://i.imgur.com/Jt07xHx.jpg)

This was a bug in NAM 32 as well (that's when I first noticed it), but with certain rotations of the Parclo loop piece that's part of the QuickChange, the location of the preview model does not match where the piece will actually be placed:
(http://i.imgur.com/LP4C8N7.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7p6yjDd.jpg)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 27, 2015, 02:51:48 PM
The good news is that both of those issues were fixed quite awhile ago.  The Parclo ramp without the QuickChange was actually an unintentional leftover that wasn't supposed to be accessible yet--it's been awhile since I've checked, but I believe it's now fixed and accessible in my current build.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on October 27, 2015, 06:00:16 PM
The good news is that both of those issues were fixed quite awhile ago.  The Parclo ramp without the QuickChange was actually an unintentional leftover that wasn't supposed to be accessible yet--it's been awhile since I've checked, but I believe it's now fixed and accessible in my current build.

-Alex

Cool. Just wanted to make sure. :)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: dyoungyn on October 28, 2015, 03:05:26 PM
Not sure if this was ever reported but it appears not matter where and how hard I try, I just can't fix this.  This is at it appears, RHW6C under 8S Flex at 7.5 M.  There does not appear to be a problem at 15M and if one is to put a space in between with the same thing at 7.5 success.

dyoungyn
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on October 28, 2015, 07:00:38 PM
roadgeek reported that one awhile back--I've fixed it for the official release (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/261).

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on October 28, 2015, 07:19:36 PM
Another issue: you cannot drag a street underneath an L1 RHW-6C or -8C without the middle tile of the RHW deconverting to RHW-2. It works fine when the RHW is at L2 but not when it's at L1.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: dyoungyn on October 29, 2015, 10:28:51 AM
Takus,

I thought so but wasn't sure.  I drives me nuts and I do monitor SC4 Devotion daily and don't recall see this trouble call.  Thank you for your attention and keeping us all up-to-date.

dyoungyn

roadgeek reported that one awhile back--I've fixed it for the official release (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/261).

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on November 05, 2015, 01:47:33 AM
You're most welcome. :thumbsup:

I've also just gotten things fixed up on our end with the NWM RD-4 and OWR-4 diagonal issues, so that won't be an issue with the official NAM 33 release.  Even though the pre-release was exceptionally stable, the last few things have been tricky to navigate.  We are still plugging away at official release preparations, though, and really appreciate everyone's patience through what has been a rather brutal and protracted release cycle.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: fefenc on November 05, 2015, 04:10:38 PM
Some oddities with the Ontario textures:

(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/395549511448167270/6255FA35CA3AE638FDF124BBA47408A1BAC61AC9/)
(http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/395549511448166853/40778D45E78196A97B1F87831F16BD41348ED962/)

These are the draggable intersections

Can't wait to master this new feature so I can kick those puzzle pieces away :D
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: matias93 on November 05, 2015, 04:26:38 PM
Some oddities with the Ontario textures:

These are the draggable intersections

Can't wait to master this new feature so I can kick those puzzle pieces away :D


In NAM 33 most custom RHW textures have gone obsolete. Tarkus has signaled that the final release will include one american and one european RHW textures, but the variety of previous versions is frozen until someone resumes the work of MandelSoft (supposing that would happen). The reason of the obsolescense is the new system for draggable interchanges, because the previous textures were bound to puzzle pieces.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: fefenc on November 05, 2015, 05:29:33 PM
Some oddities with the Ontario textures:

These are the draggable intersections

Can't wait to master this new feature so I can kick those puzzle pieces away :D


In NAM 33 most custom RHW textures have gone obsolete. Tarkus has signaled that the final release will include one american and one european RHW textures, but the variety of previous versions is frozen until someone resumes the work of MandelSoft (supposing that would happen). The reason of the obsolescense is the new system for draggable interchanges, because the previous textures were bound to puzzle pieces.
Ah, then I think I should reinstall NAM, but this time I should uncheck the Ontario textures
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on November 05, 2015, 08:04:27 PM
Careful with the quotations when pictures are involved--it gets really unwieldy and generally isn't necessary.  I've edited the last two posts to compact things down.

Now, putting on my (metaphorical) NAM hat, in addition to the draggable changes, there's just a ton of new stuff that's been added that isn't covered by the multiple versions of the MandelSoft textures.  As the RHW continues to expand, that would have been a recurring theme anytime we added a new features.

MandelSoft did upload his entire depository, with source files (in Inkscape SVG form), so if anyone who is a big fan of his sets and has the time, energy, and skills to keep it going, we can set you up with that package. 

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: roadgeek on November 07, 2015, 10:26:33 PM
You're most welcome. :thumbsup:

I've also just gotten things fixed up on our end with the NWM RD-4 and OWR-4 diagonal issues, so that won't be an issue with the official NAM 33 release.  Even though the pre-release was exceptionally stable, the last few things have been tricky to navigate.  We are still plugging away at official release preparations, though, and really appreciate everyone's patience through what has been a rather brutal and protracted release cycle.

-Alex

OWR-4 diagonals? Did I read that right? I don't recall seeing anything like that.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on November 07, 2015, 10:54:09 PM
There's been OWR-4 diagonals for about the past 4 years.  All NWM networks have had diagonals for quite a long time.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on November 08, 2015, 01:27:35 AM
Another issue: you cannot drag a street underneath an L1 RHW-6C or -8C without the middle tile of the RHW deconverting to RHW-2. It works fine when the RHW is at L2 but not when it's at L1.

Sorry for quoting myself, but did anyone notice this post?
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on November 08, 2015, 01:48:22 AM
I did notice it, though haven't investigated it until now.  I have replicated it and it's now Issue #272 (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/272).  Kinda bizarre it exists the way it does, as the other undercrossing networks work fine, and the L2 networks are generally less stable than the L1s.  The code seems to be flat out missing, though as the L1-C-Center-over-Road works fine, I can just copy the code over and change a few 1s to 0s.

Edit: And fixed.  #272 is closed.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Schohns on November 13, 2015, 07:04:48 AM
I found a NWM bug:
(http://i.imgur.com/FOyxKJG.jpg)

I dragged both curves in the exact same way, yet only one of them is working. The blank tile turned brown while dragging the road and it's not only a texture bug, since the paths are missing as well.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: gtaman on November 13, 2015, 08:39:11 AM
try to level land in that area.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: compdude787 on November 13, 2015, 10:29:22 AM
I did notice it, though haven't investigated it until now.  I have replicated it and it's now Issue #272 (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/272).  Kinda bizarre it exists the way it does, as the other undercrossing networks work fine, and the L2 networks are generally less stable than the L1s.  The code seems to be flat out missing, though as the L1-C-Center-over-Road works fine, I can just copy the code over and change a few 1s to 0s.

Edit: And fixed.  #272 is closed.

-Alex

Thanks, Alex!
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on November 13, 2015, 06:48:33 PM
I found a NWM bug:

I dragged both curves in the exact same way, yet only one of them is working. The blank tile turned brown while dragging the road and it's not only a texture bug, since the paths are missing as well.

That one's already been reported and fixed. 

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: titanicbuff on November 14, 2015, 08:34:34 PM
Well at least when it comes I'll be back in SC4 again- been playing Skylines- to many ideas about what I wanna do-
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Simmer2 on November 15, 2015, 02:27:57 AM
Hello.
Question regarding the RRW portion of NAM33.
Are any new RRW textures pieces included in this iteration or are they still the same as NAM32.
I'm wondering if NAM33 has a more complete set so that it covers almost all rail station/freight yards rail texture combination.
If not then I will just manually re-texture the lots in question.

Simmer 2
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: eggman121 on November 15, 2015, 02:47:19 AM
Question regarding the RRW portion of NAM33.
Are any new RRW textures pieces included in this iteration or are they still the same as NAM32.
I'm wondering if NAM33 has a more complete set so that it covers almost all rail station/freight yards rail texture combination.
If not then I will just manually re-texture the lots in question.

Hello Simmer2

More information on this front is documented here: http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=16787.0

We do understand that there is a bit of mismatching between the RRW and the old texture sets. They won't be part of the NAM but when I have time I will try to compete a set since I would like a set myself  ;)

I am trying some new things so there may be more development on that front.

-eggman121
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Alan_Waters on November 17, 2015, 11:24:51 AM
All good day! Thanks to the team for the wonderful mod!

Problems with the El Rail:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA9KhUBLXT4

The same thing happens with the GLR at the crossroads. It was in version 32. Plopping puzzle fixes the problem for a two minutes, and then stops again at crossroads. Will it be corrected in the final version?


Please forgive my poor English, I really do not speak English. &ops
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Alan_Waters on November 17, 2015, 01:14:31 PM
Reinstall the "NAM-33" from "El Rail Alternates." In place of the tram stop at the intersection, there were boxes. Remove part of the way in which the box and was again extended the rail. A minute later reappeared box.


(http://savepic.su/6489342.png)
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: tobsen on November 18, 2015, 08:51:44 AM
Hey Guys...i have a little problem... when i want to have turning lanes on my road crossings these are on the wrong site after i clicked with the one way road on the crossing. I use rhd and standart textures. Does anyone know how to solve the problem??? 

Cheers

Tobsen
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Alan_Waters on November 21, 2015, 05:37:23 AM
Diagonal Bridge Enabler does not work on version 33, on the bridge appear box.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Synthael on November 21, 2015, 12:25:53 PM
Heya guys, I found another LHD related bug/oversight: paths for L1 road overpass over diagonal rail (puzzle pieces) aren't right, road paths are ok, but rail paths are still RHD.

I hope I'm not repeating someone else with this bug report...  ;D
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on November 21, 2015, 12:49:02 PM
The first El-Rail problem looks to be a pathing/RUL issue, that probably needs looking into. The GLR pathing was fixed and should make the final release.

The issue with the brown boxes is likely because you are missing a dependency required for the T21s of MLs mod. It's working fine here, you might want to try re-installing the NAM since a file must be missing as the NAM doesn't have external dependencies.

DBE does work with version 33. The rail part is a little finicky if using RRW, but otherwise the functionality is there. Again if you are missing T21s, I can't understand why they are not present and can only suggest a reinstall.

As for the Road Turning Lanes - I looked at the textures for the LHD EU version recently, they were a bit of a mess. I'm not sure if the same issues are present for the RHD versions also. I'll take a look at them later but I don't know if a fix will make 33's release.

The 7.5m Rail and GLR overpasses due to coding limitations can not link to alternate LHD paths in the way the rest of the NAM does. However, if you override the RHD paths with LHD versions it works fine, I uploaded a fix for this here (http://sc4devotion.com/forums/index.php?topic=16939.msg499671#msg499671).
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Alan_Waters on November 21, 2015, 01:26:31 PM
Dear MGB204, maybe you're right, but I use RHD in all modes. Just can not understand why there are boxes on the diagonal bridges.  ()what() &cry2
Once your "Maxis Highway Override patch" does not correct texture for Raised Highway in the tunnel.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Synthael on November 23, 2015, 06:10:58 AM
I found a NWM bug:
(http://i.imgur.com/FOyxKJG.jpg)

I dragged both curves in the exact same way, yet only one of them is working. The blank tile turned brown while dragging the road and it's not only a texture bug, since the paths are missing as well.

I second this bug, I investigated a bit and discovered it happens only on RD-4 (MAVE-4, as I still call it). I tested it on completely flat ground, when dragging 45 degree curves, first middle tile auto connects and makes intersection and then disappears. Also, when I clicked near curve made before NAM 33, it revered to this bugged version. 90 degree curves are OK. RD-6 and TLA-5 (as they're closest in way of dragging) work as intended. Btw, tested on LHD version.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Tarkus on November 23, 2015, 11:57:14 AM
As previously mentioned, this one has been fixed on our end (https://github.com/BluelightningSC4/Network-Addon-Mod/issues/271) for the upcoming official release.

-Alex
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: titanicbuff on November 23, 2015, 04:54:52 PM
wish people would read further before posting an issue.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on November 23, 2015, 10:28:13 PM
Dear MGB204, maybe you're right, but I use RHD in all modes. Just can not understand why there are boxes on the diagonal bridges.  ()what() &cry2

Brown boxes here would mean a T21 prop is missing. The DBE works by using T21s to add props (Bridge supports) onto the regular transit network. Thus if you are getting a box, you must be missing some dependency somewhere. Check first if the same problem occurs with only the NAM installed, if the box is still there you'll need to reinstall the NAM since something is missing.

If with only the NAM the problem disappears, then most likely another mod is overriding one or more of the bridge t21 props, but a required dependency is missing. This would almost certainly be a light replacement mod, I can't think what else would be showing up on bridges, especially the DBE ones.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: roadgeek on November 24, 2015, 11:51:15 AM
I found one that I don't see on Git Hub. The RHW4 E1 ramp has a graphical glitch at L1.

EDIT: I will provide an image when I get an opportunity to do so.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: afagund on November 25, 2015, 01:05:22 PM
This is what happens when I plop an elevated level 3 and 4 starter piece. Seems to be missing the road texture.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: mgb204 on November 25, 2015, 01:26:40 PM
Re-Run the installer and check you've got the L3/L4 RHW networks selected in the installer.
Title: Re: NAM 33 Pre-Release -- Discussion, Support, and Bug Report Thread
Post by: Alan_Waters on November 25, 2015, 02:07:19 PM
This is what happens when I plop an elevated level 3 and 4 starter piece. Seems to be missing the road texture.
Yes, I have the same thing.