linear water object

[zbobg]

I have several streams to install in my new route. Using the standard water tile is problematic. The water tile can't be adjusted to the slope of the scenery, it can only be installed as a flat level object. Placing these water tiles on steeply sloped scenery results in many height gaps between the different water tiles.

So I designed a linear water object that operates exactly like a road. It is a linear object that is slightly buried in the terrain is a dug-out streambed. The pieces are used just like a road, they can be joined together, they can be straight pieces and curved pieces and the object can be of varying gradients. The object itself is really just a modification of the standard Road object and is used as if it were a 'water road'. There are three widths: same as road pieces, 1 lane, 2 lane and 4 lane. They're not actual lanes, that's just the width.

Pics:
Standard water tile, notice the height gap in the far tile.
water_tile.jpg (http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/zbobg/RailSim/water_tile.jpg)

Water Road, one buried, one on the left to show appearance. Note the gradient markers. Yes they do adjust.
water_tile_grad.jpg (http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/zbobg/RailSim/water_tile_grad.jpg)

Pieces separated.
water_tile_select.jpg (http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii296/zbobg/RailSim/water_tile_select.jpg)

I haven't packaged this for distribution just yet. I think this will make creation of good looking streams easier.

By the way, how do I do thumbnails instead of embedding the pics in the post? Found out, I think.

[woodfyr]

I have spent two evenings attempting to "build" a river as the base for a route. Your water road looks like the answer to a prayer.

What I really need is rapids and waterfalls.

Looking forward to the release.

Thanks

[sniper297]

Before you reinvent the wheel, try the object set filter and then linear loft objects.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/attachment.php?attachmentid=1768&stc=1&d=1203783084

Generic one has no banks, can be adjusted for width. If you select the gradient tool after laying it, you can hold down the L key and click on it to snap it to the terrain contours, then run the lower terrain tool along it to give it depth.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/attachment.php?attachmentid=1768&stc=1&d=1203783335

Waterfall in Roller Skating Down Ladders route in the file library. :cool:

[zbobg]

There's no such beastie in my library of items (US RS version, only US objects enabled).

Could you give a bit more detail of where you found that loft item?

If I understand you correctly 'linear loft objects' is some kind of an add-on. Where do I find that?

[sniper297]

But don't get me started on that, the way this game was put together is sheer lunacy IMAO. No, it's not an addon, it's included with the US version, you just need to set the object filter for the route you're working on to get all the assets included with the US version. Even after that you still don't get everything, terrain textures you can choose one or the other but not both. They're supposedly working on "tweaking" the object filter, altho I still think the best bet would be to trash the whole idea and put everything in the same subfolder.

There I go off on a rant again, where was I? Yes, the US version has one US route and three European routes, by default when you make a new route it has the filter set for ONLY the content from the US route if you use that for a template, or only the European content if you use default or one of the three European routes for a template. To get access to ALL the content included with the US version you need to set the object filter ON for the content that's "foreign" to the route you used as a template. See PO&N US2 or the Metro Suburban US version in our file library, those both have the object filter ON for US content, altho both were created using the default template. Both of those routes use US and European content, the reason they're compatible with the US only version is because I deleted all the York Newcastle content and replaced with either US content or European content that's included in the US version. I told you not to get me started on that. :rolleyes: Anyway, set the object filter on, you can then use all the available content and your route will still be compatible with the US only version, it just won't be compatible with the EU only version if you use US content.

EDIT: Wait a minute, I see the problem, blasted newfangled forum software replaced my first picture with a dupe of the second pic. Here's the one that was supposed to go there;

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/attachment.php?attachmentid=1774&stc=1&d=1203801441

Click the little blue box, pull out the right side flyout, hunt up Kuju\Railsimulator (or Kuju\RailsimulatorUS if you have the EU objects but not the US) and check the box ON. Only need to do that once for each route, after that it will list both sets, and also list both types of trainsets.

[zbobg]

Yes, I see that now. That's what I thought was the problem. I haven't yet used ANY of the EU content.

While I'm starting to develop this route I didn't want to turn on the EU content at first because it clutters up the menus with lots of stuff that I don't need right now making it difficult to select the items that I want. The tracks menu in particular is loaded with track entries that I have no need for when I'm only using US track.

Eventually I'll turn on the EU content to use the additional scenery objects but while I'm still just laying track I want the EU content off.

I'm still shy of the terrain paint thing. I assume that the first content you base your route on determines which terrain paint definition you get. I expect that if RSDL ever resolves their compatibility issues the whole terrain paint thing will either work properly (maybe by selecting the one you want) or they'll completely break it.

I get the distinct impression that we're still beta testing this software. In a year RSDL may get all the problems and omissions fixed but by then it may be a non-issue with MSTS2 arriving on the scene.

Thanks for the explanation and directions to the water generic river object. All this would be somewhat easier if ALL the asset content was centrally located and common to ALL routes. It would also help if some of the catagories could be further divided into sub-catagories so the menus wouldn't be so cluttered.

[sniper297]

"Somewhat easier", understatement of the year.
One addendum I forgot, all those river objects have handles on the side, unlike the roads they're adjustable for width. :cool:
Curious how you did the road to water thing, I made a custom track section by making a new developers subfolder for it, then copying all the generic yard 1 textures over there before hacking to change the internal file paths (the part that makes cloning so beastly difficult) and in spite of all that got a missing texture when making switches.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/attachment.php?attachmentid=1778&stc=1&d=1203811886

What I did was alpha out the ballast for use on bridges and EL tracks, unfortunately it don't work right, the ties just fade out a hundred yards away, and don't paint on the switches at all. I also need to make an open girder type loft bridge for the EL tracks, but cloning an existing loft bridge with assorted files scattered in several different subfolders it looks like I'd have to make a career out of it. :confused:

[zbobg]

Your missing track texture might be: US_track_supersleep01.TgPcDx for US track - although it doesn't look like US track.
For EU track it might be: track_supersleep01.TgPcDx

The fading-out ties is probably just the mip-map. Be sure you have saved the right number of mip-maps. You might try to hand edit the mip-maps, not fun and probably won't work much better than what you have now.

I know about the water handles. I still don't know if I want to use that generic water river object. It has a geometry file, the road does not. I'm thinking that the geometry file may make the water river object much more complicated to draw (than the modified road) thereby taking up more CPU resources which is a concern when actually running the sim. Although the generic water object is a pleasure to use when placing scenery.

--EDIT--
I've also found a glaring error in the US track definition files. Track02 is named "SanB Bars Yard" and Track04 is named "SanB Bars yard" - the difference in the name is the caps - Yard vs. yard. What's interesting is that only the lower case "yard" track shows up in the tracks list. I'm going to change the display name of the first one and see if it shows up. I can only think it doesn't show up because the lower case "y" in ASCII follows the upper case "Y" with the result that the second filename overrides the first. The geometry of each is completely different but I don't know how that's reflected in what gets drawn. I've been using the lower case "yard" track and now I wonder if that's been a big mistake although the laid track does seem to work.

[sniper297]

That was it, needed to copy them supersleep textures in there.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/attachment.php?attachmentid=1793&stc=1&d=1203879842

Just need to fix the mips and make a loft object with an open girder texture and I can do the Chicago Elevated for real here. :cool:

"thereby taking up more CPU resources which is a concern when actually running the sim", haven't sorted out what does what yet, worst one I have is in the Metro Suburban route, approaching New York I get a 3 to 7 second pause as it loads scenery. No water involved, altho there are a couple loft bridges and a gazillion static bridge objects involved, probably need to make a tunnel clone with brick walls to eliminate a zillion or so of them static bridges. More loft bridges at the Chicago end of the route and I don't get the pause there. Some people have said water highest detail is the biggest framerate hit, haven't been able to duplicate that on the PO&N, so I run with water cranked to max.

" I've also found a glaring error in the US track definition files"

ONE??!!

IMAO the US version was a rush job, the track TEXTURES ain't even finished since the switches don't match the main track textures. Close but no cigar on the mainline, they didn't even get the other three track textures in the ballpark.

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/attachment.php?attachmentid=1794&stc=1&d=1203879849

http://forums.flightsim.com/vbts/attachment.php?attachmentid=1795&stc=1&d=1203879857

All the European track textures blend the main texture with the switches pretty good, the US ones are the only really bad ones. :mad:

[zbobg]

I hacked the entire set of US tracks to fix the errors and omissions. I left Track01, the US Mainline track, as it is and based the others on it. All the US tracks now have proper buffers, they are of the same cross-section and the textures on junctions (particularly the yard track) now are much better than stock.

The two pics are just a random look at the Yard textures. The problem with the original definition files is that one of the cross-section files (for each) was missing for track04 (yard) and track05 (yard slack). I cloned a copy and filled in the proper texture files along with fixing some other errors. Track02 (mainline Yard) was also almost completely unusable because the track was drawn as a flat object, there was no 3D info in the file. That was also fixed by cloning the cross-section from track01.

The two pics are of the SB yard track (track04) when using the Yard track rule. Note that the texture color of the junctions is improved, there are proper buffers automatically added and the proper US switch stand is now drawn for manual junctions. Note also that distant junctions do tend to go quite dark but it's not too bad looking. The other track types have similar improvements.

Sorry, but since these modifications are based on the Mk1 US track and the modified track objects all inherit the faults of the US mainline track such as the moire effect although to a lesser degree.

I have packaged this modification for distribution but I'm reluctant to release it just yet because it does replace the original track objects. While this should not break any existing US track in a route I'm concerned that the RS Mk2 update may or may not be compatible with these changes. I am mostly concerned that when the Mk2 patch arrives it may or may not properly update with its patched track files (if it has any). The existing track objects are just so bad that any replacement may be better than doing nothing. The remaining option is to not use any of the US tracks and wait for the Mk2 update. Your opinions are welcome.

I may try to prepare an add-on track package instead of replacing the existing US track objects but I haven't yet determined if it's even possible and how that would affect existing US track objects. I would like to replace them transparently (the track objects in a route) without deleting the original files - don't know if that's possible. My existing package does contain a backup of the original files so that may be all that's really necessary.

[sniper297]

Those look a lot better. I'd go with the direct replacement, any subsequent patch would overwrite them that way. If you have backups included there's no potential for disaster I can think of, and if you want you can zip them up and send them to me, I'll write install and restore bat files to simplify changing back and forth.

The way the program works, when you start the game and select a route, as the route is loading it reads the tracks.bin file for that route and loads the filenames of the track textures listed. So whatever you have painted for SanB_Bars_track01.bin that's the texture that will show up on any section that has SanB_Bars_track01.bin on it. Bat file "copy Cajon_track01_ballast.bak Cajon_track01_ballast.TgPcDx /y" for example, would restore the original texture if needed, same thing for all the bin and Xsec files.

[zbobg]

I'm experienced in writing .bat files so that's not a problem. I had considered that and it's probably the best solution.

I guess I'll write something and test it today then add that to the zip to be installed with the package.

I just hate to overwrite someone's files and have the possibility of it blowing up.

I would like to be able to disable an install if I could detect a non-compatible set of files. I would not like to overwrite the files in the event that a Mk2 patch fixed the errors for example. I'll have to see if there's a simple way to do that in a .bat file.

The problem with (standard) .bat files these days is that the current XP SP2 and Vista have changed the way batch files work, many of the batch features that previously existed have been removed and one can no longer depend on having a particular feature available even in the near future.

If you can't tell, I'm uncomfortable with having to rely on a .bat file. But I think that's the only easy and ordinarily reasonable solution short of a custom installer.

On the other hand, most people who might want to use these replacement files would ordinarily pretty much know their way around their computer. I don't think it's a big issue but you have seen some of the posts of the absolutely clueless users. That's what I would like to avoid - not confusing the clueless, I mean.

[sniper297]

Yeah, I'm with you there, primary reason I try to make everything dummyproof is so I don't have to answer the same questions over and over. :rolleyes: I used to use the IF EXIST switch for the original EZstuff, but found if it was run from the wrong folder it would just return a series of "file not found" errors, so that safeguard wasn't really needed.

Option 2, use Mike's RStoolsTMB to package the originals and replacements separately, run the one AssetSetup.exe to install the new stuff, run the other one to reinstall the old (already broken!) stuff.

"I would like to be able to disable an install if I could detect a non-compatible set of files. I would not like to overwrite the files in the event that a Mk2 patch fixed the errors for example. I'll have to see if there's a simple way to do that in a .bat file."

May have something there, if the new files from the mark 2 patch have the same names as the originals (and they would need to in order to fix things retroactively), I think XCOPY with the /D switch might work for that. If not, reinstalling the mark 2 patch would fix it, and you can always pull your unofficial patch from the file library if the mark 2 patch fixes the problem better than yours.