• Welcome to SC4 Devotion Forum Archives.

FLEX Turn Lanes (FTL) and Related Projects - Development and Support

Started by Tarkus, August 01, 2009, 09:36:25 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Durfsurn

So say I was to make those textures into puzzle pieces I would not use those textures but overlaying arrows instead? Looks like I have a lot to learn if I want to create some more textures, are there any tutorials on this overlaying arrow thing? What I assumed I could do was use those textures and apply them to Maarten's tutorial with making puzzle pieces. Sorry for all the questions but I would like to see the expansion of TuLEP's and how else to help it along other than by doing it myself? :P Also there is no point to me making any more textures if they aren't done right.

GDO29Anagram

Quote from: Durfsurn on June 30, 2014, 01:37:28 AM
So say I was to make those textures into puzzle pieces I would not use those textures but overlaying arrows instead?

You don't even need a new texture at all, but what you need to know at this point is how to perform basic S3D editing. Actually, as it stands, even that method could become obsolete because you could also turn the arrows into props and affix them using a type 21 exemplar. Actually, as it stands, a lot of the current TuLEPs are being reconsidered..
<INACTIVE>
-----
Simtropolis | YouTube | MLP Forums

Durfsurn

Well until you awesome guys at the NAM team release the "reconsidered" approach I will wait to make anymore textures/S3D models. Thanks for the help Ganaram

Blue Lightning

For TuLEPs and arrow cosmetic pieces, you don't need any new textures unless there's no pre-existing texture for that lane geometry. So for all the textures that you linked, all of those can be done by taking the base network texture and applying it to a flat plane, then "stickering" the arrows on top (you've noticed how you can select different arrow styles for the RHW cosmetic pieces? Yeah, we just have a library of arrow textures that we sticker on and can also easily swap them out).
Also known as Wahrheit

Occasionally lurks.

RHW Project

Durfsurn

Today I did a quick PP using a half decent (not NAM standard just yet ;) ) texture I made a month ago.



Unfortunately I can't get it to rotate; as usual here is my RUL0 code:

[HighwayIntersectionInfo_0x0005FF2]
;Added by Durfsurn 07/29/2014
;Avenue Short Lane S-Curve
Piece = 0.0, 0.0, 0, 0, 0x5FF10045
PreviewEffect = preview_avelanescurve

CellLayout =.....
CellLayout =.ab.<
CellLayout =.^...

CheckType = a - avenue:0x02040200 road:0x02000200
CheckType = b - avenue:0x02000204 road:0x02000200

ConsLayout =.....
ConsLayout =.++.<
ConsLayout =.^...

AutoTileBase = 0x5FF10040
ReplacementIntersection = 0, 0
PlaceQueryID = 0x5FF10040
Costs       = 410

[HighwayIntersectionInfo_0x00015FF2]
CopyFrom = 0x05FF2
Rotate = 1
[HighwayIntersectionInfo_0x00025FF2]
CopyFrom = 0x05FF2
Rotate = 2
[HighwayIntersectionInfo_0x00035FF2]
CopyFrom = 0x05FF2
Rotate = 3


And tab ring:

AddTypes =  5FF2, 45FF2, 15FF2, 55FF2, 25FF2, 65FF2, 35FF2, 75FF2 ;Avenue Short Lane S-Curve

Tarkus

I think part of the reason it won't rotate is because you've specified 8 HIDs in the RotationRing section, but in the definition for the piece itself, you only defined 4 of the HIDs.

-Alex

Durfsurn

I originally had 8  but to no avail. I actually copied from a piece coded by you Alex, the Avenue Type A1 piece as for as rotations go.

j-dub

I remember that middle split concept being used before automatic NWM implementation caused TuLEPs to be developed later, the textures were not ready for the yellow design scheme, as they were the old white center avenue turn lane textures at the time.  Since that middle split 1x2 turn lane has never been visited again, for quite some time, it's really appreciated that you brought the concept back to life, Durfsurn, it makes matters a lot more realistic and easier. There are plenty of times where I could of used such a piece.

Durfsurn

Ahem...

Thanks to memo for the textures.

compdude787

Quote from: Durfsurn on August 03, 2014, 04:34:34 AM
Ahem...
[snip]
Thanks to memo for the textures.

Now that looks a lot better and more realistic!
Check out my MD, United States of Simerica!
Last updated: March 5, 2017

My YouTube Channel

j-dub

And Thank U DS, for going thru with the execution! Again, it's really appreciated.

max19950324

I've always been thinking, is it possible to make TuLEP tiles that crosses elevated network like El-Rail, monorail, and rail viaduct?

jdenm8

It's perfectly possible, it was even demonstrated with Rail. It wouldn't even require new models, just merging existing ones. However, we may have something else up our sleeves.


"We're making SimCity, not some dopey casual game." -Ocean Quigley

compdude787

Quote from: jdenm8 on September 15, 2014, 03:18:22 AM
However, we may have something else up our sleeves.

Hmmm, I'd be curious to see what this is.... ;)
Check out my MD, United States of Simerica!
Last updated: March 5, 2017

My YouTube Channel

dyoungyn

NAM Team,

Something I believe we all have been wanting for years now are one way road TLUPs as in diamond interchange lights.  The Maxis lights works in the mean time, only looking for consistency with other TLUPs and last but not least dedicated turning lane(s) for one way roads.

Tarkus

There's been a few internal prototypes for getting signals working on One-Way Roads, and, accordingly, getting TuLEPs in place for them.  SIPs, or Signalized Intersection Pieces, had been discussed back in 2011, and involved using trick CheckTypes to get the stop points to work, without reducing capacity.  Coincidentally, the other day, I started re-investigating the situation there. 

The idea of adding a bunch of static puzzle pieces, as the original SIPs plan entailed, is not a particularly desirable solution anymore, especially as those puzzle pieces would be a bunch of variations on the same basic configuration.  And there'd need to be tons of them to cover all the bases.  My main purpose in re-opening things with it is to see if there's a feasible FLEX solution.  My experiments have had a few promising findings, but I haven't found a fully satisfactory solution yet.

Without giving away too much, you can probably infer certain things about certain other projects from that. ;)

-Alex

dyoungyn

Alex,

Thank you for the reply.  Again, Maxis is working as such thing and with NWM5 is what I use for the avenue(s) for turning lanes.  As you may know, the paths for avenues 5 and 7 are rather singular for left and right hand turns. 

If I may ask, aren't TuLEPs utilizing SIPs.  Why are one way roads any different?  There is only two directions going, one straight across from exit ramp to entrance and the other across AVE(s). 

I am not at all trying to show that I am some critiquing individual, only an ignorant hard core SC4 player that loves the game thanks to people such as your self for ingenious thinking. 

Tarkus

With networks like Roads and Avenues, the game has stop point functionality built-in, whereas with the One-Way Road network, the functionality doesn't exist, in large part because of how Maxis implemented the directional flipping functionality.  The RUL files controlling the OWR network's placement can't actually determine which way the OWR is headed, as the directionality is controlled by a separate routine presumably buried somewhere in the executable.  In fact, the base One-Way Road orthogonal tile has a path file that looks identical to that of the two-way Road--the routine flips one half of the path file depending on which way the OWR is pointed in game, but doesn't actually flip the network tile itself.

The fact that the existing TuLEP intersections involving Road and Avenue (and NWM TLA-5 and 7) had signals was nothing special, though there was some trick stop point placement that allowed for the signals to be arranged in a more American fashion. 

The SIPs were kind of like TuLEPs, but were designed specifically just for allowing signals on OWRs rather than for adding turn lanes.  In order to get the signalization to operate properly, the puzzle piece had to be set to be underlaid with two networks--One-Way Road, and Road, the latter enabling the signal functionality.  This was a shot of the prototype in action in October 2010. (Tarkusian Cities fans of yore may recognize the spot.)



Like all the OWR TuLEP stuff, it never got beyond that initial prototype, and never got into a release track.  There was also an attempt I had at signalizing the old Elevated Avenue/MIS crossing piece (also in a familiar Tarkusian Cities setting) . . .



It operated on similar principles, with a trick CheckType setup (both "DirtRoad" and Avenue) to combat the fact that the RHW network does not natively support stop points.

The only reason SIPs or OWR-related things never came to fruition with TuLEPs was the fact that there were other projects going on which had more momentum, SIPs required a lot of T21 exemplar work, and there were still some implementation quirks that needed to be ironed out. 

The issue now is that a puzzle-based implementation would be problematic, not least of all because of how many SIPs would be required to handle all the crosslinks with various TuLEP and NWM configurations.  The implementation matter is also a part of the reason why there's been no publicly-seen activity on TuLEPs for quite some time.  There was a prototype of a new implementation that was worked on shortly after NAM 32's release in early 2014, which memo and I were working on, but it's lain dormant for awhile now.

-Alex

eggman121

In addition to Alex's comments there are some more planned implementation of Draggable TuLEPs in the future.

Here is just one that I whipped up today.



and its use!



More of this type of functionality is on the horizon.

-eggman121

matias93

I understand the focus of NAM 34 is in those magical improvements to RRW, but there is a possibility of this wonder reaching that same version of the NAM?


Anyway, you guys are wizards! &apls

"Lets be scientists and as such, remember always that the purpose of politics is not freedom, nor authority, nor is any principle of abstract character,
but it is to meet the social needs of man and the development of the society"

— Valentín Letelier, 1895