NAM 31 Central Bug Tracker Thread

[mgarcia]

The CTDs seem to be because your computers, for some reason, are unable to handle the size of the controller file.  We're shrinking it for NAM 31.1 by removing a bunch of RUL2 stability code.

-Alex

Thanks Alex - Awesome work by the way.  Real glad I installed the new NAM.

Merari

[Sirial]

The CTDs seem to be because your computers, for some reason, are unable to handle the size of the controller file.  We're shrinking it for NAM 31.1 by removing a bunch of RUL2 stability code.

-Alex

Have you guys ran into any eye poking differences in computer setups from different people ? Curious to see if I could do something on my end to improve performance on my system running the nam.

[Wiimeiser]

Only crashed for me once so far, and that was when I opened the roads menu, so I assume it had to do with writing to the nonrewards table or something...

[GDO29Anagram]

Have you guys ran into any eye poking differences in computer setups from different people ? Curious to see if I could do something on my end to improve performance on my system running the nam.

We initially thought that computers with newer Intel processors (i7's) had a higher chance of crashing. Also, my computer (with an AMD FX 4170 processor) has never even crashed as a direct result of the NAM. Still, as a means of reducing a lot of redundancy, we're still going forward with shrinking the Controller to the bare minimum amount of override code.

[RepublicMaster]

Will that effect any stability of networks? I haven't had any CTDs related to NAM and I have a i7 core.

[Tarkus]

Will that effect any stability of networks? I haven't had any CTDs related to NAM and I have a i7 core.

We are having to remove more "exotic" adjacency stabilization for the RHW.  If you ever wanted to stick an L2 RHW-4-over-L1 RHW-3 right next to an L3 RHW-6S-over-L2 RHW-4 overpass, with no separation, you're going to be out of luck, but we figure most people aren't going to do that.

The number of lines per network for the networks that got a full treatment (most of the L1 networks--this is why the L2 and higher networks are so wobbly, as they have much less in place) was 131,000 lines per network, roughly.  I've whittled that down to about 44,000 lines per network for the L1 RHW-4 (which is being used as a template network)--some less popular networks (e.g. L2 RHW-3) will likely have a bit less.  There's technically about 40 RHW networks right now--we have to be careful.

-Alex

[´br]

Can someone confirm the problem or will it be fixed in 31.1 ? The 7.5m overpasses are really cool and fit great in my cities

Hello,
I have found some missing paths at the orthogonal road (7.5m) over orthogonal rail overpass. There are no paths for rail shown and the rail track isn't passable in UDI. The other 7.5m road over rail overpasses seem to work proper.
Picture:

[memo]

Can someone confirm the problem or will it be fixed in 31.1 ? The 7.5m overpasses are really cool and fit great in my cities

Confirmed and fixed.

[pierrebaptiste]

Hello

I have noticed a new bug . When you use a big city (the size of map , when it's the more big size) , you save your game and you decide to come back on the region. It's impossible , the game bugs and come back to the desk 

[Wiimeiser]

Hello

I have noticed a new bug . When you use a big city (the size of map , when it's the more big size) , you save your game and you decide to come back on the region. It's impossible , the game bugs and come back to the desk 

I've never gotten that. The one crash I've had so far was menu-related.

[Enslaved Viking]

Gave NAM 31 a try, but its not working for me. Takes too long to a load a city (even small ones), two-to-three minutes of extremely slow scrolling, it crashes to desktop. (I can't find the old version Jun '09 for download either).

Pics, I love how the new NAM looks like.

[GDO29Anagram]

Gave NAM 31 a try, but its not working for me. Takes too long to a load a city (even small ones), two-to-three minutes of extremely slow scrolling, it crashes to desktop.

Increased loading time is inevitable for such a large package, which is something to keep in mind. The crashing is something we're already aware of.

[metarvo]

There are missing paths on the outer tiles of L1 and L2 diagonal RHW-8C.

We are having to remove more "exotic" adjacency stabilization for the RHW.

This doesn't RUL out draggable overpasses for wider RHWs, does it?   

[GDO29Anagram]

This doesn't RUL out draggable overpasses for wider RHWs, does it?

All basic RHWxRHW setups are the ones being kept. Only the redundant ones are the ones being thrown out. We're talking about SAMxRHW crossings directly next to RHWxRHW crossings, and the like.

[Indiana Joe]

Those kind of situations can usually be remedied by putting starter pieces on each side anyway.  One thing I think would be cool to see, and would open up more compact interchange options, would be diagonal versions of all the starters.  Maybe something to consider next time you guys get around to another RHW-oriented update.

[spot]

Im not sure if this has been reported yet.

[jdenm8]

Even if the piece had starter pieces on it, they'd exhibit exactly the same behaviour as the loose ones. It's a RUL error that causes it.
They're also traditional puzzle pieces, not Flex pieces.

I would leave another tile between the puzzle piece and the overpass so there is a stable override.

[a44bigdog]

I am new to Sim City 4 and the NAM so this may not be a bug but it is weird behavior that I did notice and verify. I just spent about 5 hours trying to create a RHW4 overpass over a railroad. I used the 7.5m terrain tools and kept having problems with the "center section" between the L1 slope pieces not converting to RHW4 over the railroad. I then separated the RHW4 lanes so that they were not adjacent but had 1 grid space between. After a bunch of messing about I noticed that dragging the second RHW4 road through would make the 1st convert. To get the second RHW4 "center section" I dragged the RHW tool parallel to the unconverted road 2 spaces away on level ground. This then converted the 2nd "center section" after which I could just bulldoze the section on the level ground and the "bridge" sections of the overpass stayed converted. I just tested this with the RHW4 roads next to each other and the same behavior was present. Dragging the second road would properly convert the 1st road and dragging a 3rd RHW road parallel to the 2nd road 2 grids away so it was on level ground and not on the embankment converted the 2nd road. This "dummy" section could then be bulldozed and everything stayed converted. I hope that makes sense without screens and my use of more or less layman's terms in the quotes.

[spot]

Edit: I got it to work by placing the starting pieces facing the opposite way. After I dragged the L0 and L1 RHW they turned the correct way.

Even if the piece had starter pieces on it, they'd exhibit exactly the same behaviour as the loose ones. It's a RUL error that causes it.

Could it be fixed? I mean, not switching directions.

I would leave another tile between the puzzle piece and the overpass so there is a stable override.

I like the feeling of compact.

[Uzil]

A lot of bugs