• Welcome to SC4 Devotion Forum Archives.

NWM (Network Widening Mod) - Development and Support

Started by Tarkus, May 03, 2007, 08:47:23 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Wiimeiser

I can't really object to a code cleanup. The cleaner and more consistent the code, the easier it is to develop new features.
Pink horse, pink horse, she rides across the nation...

jeffryfisher

Quote from: Tarkus on May 11, 2021, 02:36:15 AM
the "next big thing" in NWM development: the long-awaited diagonal intersection and crossing functionality.
Now that's exciting! Before making diagonal intersections though, be sure you're happy with the paths on diagonal networks themselves. Last time I looked, TLA-7 was a little bit squeezed, with only pedestrians able to use the outermost cells. As a result, TLA-7 had no more capacity than TLA-5 when diagonal.

Don't feel like you must finish all intersections at once; it would be amazing if you just rolled out one generally useful one to start (e.g. vanilla road).

:thumbsup:
Modding PC games since 1993 (back when we needed hex-editors)

Jack_wilds


roadgeek

Quote from: Tarkus on May 11, 2021, 02:36:15 AM
However, one of the major issues I've encountered in the initial groundwork is that there's some notable inconsistencies in terms of how certain intersections are rotated.  These issues are, oddly enough, most prevalent with the single-tile networks, with the ARD-3--arguably the most unstable of all the NWM networks--being the biggest offender.
If we don't see any improvements on ARD-3, but we get additional capabilities with AVE-6 and AVE-7, I will not be the least bit disappointed!

Tarkus

What revamped NWM code gets you . . . not that anyone actually needs to build an absurdity like this:



-Alex


Wiimeiser

#3585
Looks like NAM 42 might have to drop the NWM from Lite at this rate... Hopefully we can do it the other way around soon, too.
Pink horse, pink horse, she rides across the nation...

Jack_wilds


roadgeek


Tarkus

#3588
Quote from: Wiimeiser on June 22, 2021, 07:15:08 AM
Looks like NAM 42 might have to drop the NWM from Lite at this rate... Hopefully we can do it the other way around soon, too.

Even with the beefed-up NWM code in its current state, the "LowRAM" Controller is still only about 60MB, which is under the apparent threshold where the 4GB Patch and a 64-bit operating system is necessary (in case anyone is wondering . . . we don't know the exact threshold where it becomes necessary, but considering that NAM 36's Full Controller was 103MB, it's somewhere north of there).  A lot of the code gain with the NWM as part of "Project 51" (the NWM RUL2 code revamp) is with NWM x RHW situations, so that gets stripped out in the generation of the "LowRAM" Controller.  Whether or not that'll remain the case once all the eventual diagonal intersection work is completed remains to be seen.

I will also note . . . the unfinished/legacy "as-is" NWM diagonal intersections that we left in as a sort of "Easter egg" back with NAM 30/NWM 2.0 a decade ago will no longer work with the new code.  They were never officially supported in their existing form, in any case, and their rotations and IIDs are kind of all over the place, and as a result, we've determined it's going to be necessary to start fresh with them. 

Quote from: roadgeek on July 19, 2021, 09:17:49 PM
OWR-3 elevated perhaps?

NWM Viaducts are on the list for future additions, but they're not going to be part of NAM 42.  We're still working out just when they'll be phased into the mod.  There's been some debate about whether NWM Viaducts in some form should come before diagonal at-grade intersections.

-Alex

Wiimeiser

I mentioned on the Discord that diagonal intersections should be given priority since we already have base network viaducts...
Pink horse, pink horse, she rides across the nation...

Tarkus

Indeed, the diagonal at-grade support has been my inclination as well.  The viaducts are also going to require some model work, which is always slower going with our limited resources on that front.  Much can be done with slight modifications to the existing Viaducts, to my knowledge, but if lots of custom geometry is required, that will slow that project down considerably when it comes time to do it.

-Alex

roadgeek

#3591
My vote is with the Diagonal NWMs as well. In fact, I would also vote to introduce FANWM before we venture too much more into viaducts. I will acknowledge though, that could possibly require new flex/starter pieces, but of course, so would new viaducts.


EDIT: Come to think of it...we have had draggable FAR and draggable FARR, but I'm guessing there are major hurdles involved in trying to get the FAOWR and FAAVE to cooperate with RUL-2 code.

Tarkus

Quote from: roadgeek on July 24, 2021, 12:35:47 PM
EDIT: Come to think of it...we have had draggable FAR and draggable FARR, but I'm guessing there are major hurdles involved in trying to get the FAOWR and FAAVE to cooperate with RUL-2 code.

FANWM's been on the drawing board since the NWM fully restarted development with superhands and myself back in 2009.  There's actually prototypes of old FANWM puzzle pieces sitting in the network .dat files, even, though obviously, doing a puzzle-based solution is a no-go in this era of NAM development.

One of the big projects that I would deem somewhat necessary before getting to that point is FLEX versions of the FA content.  People have a hard enough time with the drag patterns for some of the existing FAR/FARR stuff (and draggable FAAVE or multi-tile FANWM is just asking for trouble), which is why eggman121 added FLEX versions of the RRW FA setups awhile ago.  Additionally, the implementation I've been experimenting with for FLEX FA will actually cut down on the amount of RUL2 required by quite a bit.

-Alex

Wiimeiser

I wonder if this FLEX FA could be used with the RHW-2...

For viaducts vs diagonal intersections, intersections first since we already have viaducts to base the viaducts on. Also, I think OWR-1 and OWR-3 should get priority for viaducts as part of the REW.
Pink horse, pink horse, she rides across the nation...

Tarkus

Quote from: Wiimeiser on July 28, 2021, 02:31:02 AM
I wonder if this FLEX FA could be used with the RHW-2...

That's the plan.  Draggable FARHW is a non-starter due to the infernal auto-connect business.

Quote from: Wiimeiser on July 28, 2021, 02:31:02 AM
For viaducts vs diagonal intersections, intersections first since we already have viaducts to base the viaducts on. Also, I think OWR-1 and OWR-3 should get priority for viaducts as part of the REW.

There's going to need to be some modifications of the existing Viaduct models in order to make versions of them that will fit certain NWM networks.  The degree of work required there is an unknown, though I'd argue that if we did indeed already have the model geometry we needed done . . . that would actually make a stronger case for doing the Viaducts earlier.

The NWM OWRs and the Triple-Tile networks would probably be highest on the list--the latter because it'd be nice to finally have that without people having to switch to RHW-6C, and allow more compact highway-to-surface interchanges (since the 6C doesn't allow at-grade intersections at any height).

-Alex

roadgeek

Quote from: Tarkus on July 27, 2021, 02:46:39 AM
Quote from: roadgeek on July 24, 2021, 12:35:47 PM
EDIT: Come to think of it...we have had draggable FAR and draggable FARR, but I'm guessing there are major hurdles involved in trying to get the FAOWR and FAAVE to cooperate with RUL-2 code.

FANWM's been on the drawing board since the NWM fully restarted development with superhands and myself back in 2009.  There's actually prototypes of old FANWM puzzle pieces sitting in the network .dat files, even, though obviously, doing a puzzle-based solution is a no-go in this era of NAM development.

One of the big projects that I would deem somewhat necessary before getting to that point is FLEX versions of the FA content.  People have a hard enough time with the drag patterns for some of the existing FAR/FARR stuff (and draggable FAAVE or multi-tile FANWM is just asking for trouble), which is why eggman121 added FLEX versions of the RRW FA setups awhile ago.  Additionally, the implementation I've been experimenting with for FLEX FA will actually cut down on the amount of RUL2 required by quite a bit.

-Alex

Any screen shots, by any chance?

Tarkus

The prototypes never made it to the point of being in-game, to my recollection.  If they did, any screenshots almost certainly fell victim to the collapse of/changes with the image hosting sites that were prevalent in that era.

Much like the diagonal intersection expansion, I'd expect any FANWM work with the planned FLEX implementation would be done in phases, probably with the base straight and curve sections done first, and quite a bit of time before we even start to think about doing the intersections.

-Alex

roadgeek

Sorry, I should have clarified the screenshots I was hoping to see.
Quote from: Tarkus on July 27, 2021, 02:46:39 AM
the implementation I've been experimenting with for FLEX FA

Tarkus

As far as screenshots of the new FLEX FAR prototype go, it's still . . . classified (though some of the stuff it does would be indistinguishable from existing forms of FAR in a screenshot).  An early version of it did actually make it into an internal testing build of NAM 42, it was cut pretty early on, as it was going to require a lot of work to finish it alongside the other planned additions.

-Alex

roadgeek

It's so fun to talk about FANWM. It's like one of those things I have been dreaming about for such a long time!