|
And now I need to figure out trains to hopefully make the industrial sector less of a traffic jam. Probably should have been more willing to spread the city out. Bit annoying that it's hard to make long-term plans with the starting roads, but I suppose it'd be too easy to blow your entire budget on the highway? Oh, I have no idea where to start with parks. Industry seemed self-explanatory enough.
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:21 |
|
|
A fictional cities skylines sequel would would be a instant sell to me if traffic followed the path of least resistance. From what I understand the traffic in cities skylines establishes it's route the instant it spawns and won't deviate unless you literally demolish something along it's path. Every single individual vehicle does this calculation and the limitations of doing anything more complicated is a hardware issue at that point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 08:02
|
|
|
I'd also like if they maybe detached things from roads a little bit. Like instead of each individual building being simulated perhaps you can simulate things per city block, with blocks having entrances and internal networks like parks, but the actual agent accessibility is just calculated on whether you can get access to the block with the internal accessibility being a function of minor roads and paths but it being statistically simulated. And you could use it to simulate things like factory complexes as well which have internal road networks but you don't actually need to simulate agents on them specifically, you'd just set up gates at points around the complex and traffic can enter or leave and service any of the factory parts on the block via any of them. Combine that with something that lets you stick props and stuff in gaps to increase the value of the whole block, and you've got the basis of a much more organic building system. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 09:25 on Apr 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 08:27
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Oh, I have no idea where to start with parks. Parks are all about funneling pedestrians through them. Put residential on one side of a long park, put your industrial and/or commercial on the other. Put gates on both sides and make all the roads that cross the park highways (no sidewalks and no bikes allowed). All your sims that would normally bike or walk to work will still do so (it's distance based), but now they'll go through your park, and pay whatever toll you set. Profit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 08:55
|
|
|
The Locator posted:Parks are all about funneling pedestrians through them. Put residential on one side of a long park, put your industrial and/or commercial on the other. Put gates on both sides and make all the roads that cross the park highways (no sidewalks and no bikes allowed). All your sims that would normally bike or walk to work will still do so (it's distance based), but now they'll go through your park, and pay whatever toll you set. Profit. Weirdly enough my IRL home city's centre is kind of designed like this, minus the tolls. And y'know what, I could start over with better planning, but I get the feeling that having to build around my own short-sightedness as I get access to better infrastructure options both provides much-needed actual challenge to what can be a very easy game and is also extremely realistic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 09:39
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:
Yeah as a newbie to the whole citybuilding thing, I like the 'progression' aspect where your old small-town stuff eventually has to get bulldozed, rezoned, or committed to "OK that's the old part of town, here comes the new part in the rest of this quadrant", but I'd still like to resolve some of my bigger blunders. Nobody wants to see how I made my first overpass back into the highway. Imagine a hugeass one-way bridge with the sharpest corner ramp back down you could manage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 10:49
|
|
|
The slight downside is that you get your public transport systems in the wrong order. Everything is car centric before you invent the train. In reality, highways should be the last thing you get except for like, monorails and poo poo. Possibly no town on earth had its rail line added after its highway system.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 11:32
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The slight downside is that you get your public transport systems in the wrong order. Everything is car centric before you invent the train. In reality, highways should be the last thing you get except for like, monorails and poo poo. Irvine, CA. The game simulates planned cities built from scratch after the 1950s, which is basically an urbanist's worst nightmare 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
 It's surprisingly fun working within the constraints of a space to figure out a traffic solution that doesn't poo poo the bed. Also goddamn but people like walking. 
OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Apr 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 17:28
|
|
|
Woah someone finally made a ped/bike only street?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Woah someone finally made a ped/bike only street? Hm? The network extensions thing has had them for ages. The things I'm using for the elevated sections are ped/bike paths.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 17:35
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The slight downside is that you get your public transport systems in the wrong order. Everything is car centric before you invent the train. In reality, highways should be the last thing you get except for like, monorails and poo poo. If the game took place 20-30 years in the future it would actually make a lot of sense for there to be a bunch of modern planned cities popping up around the world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 18:28
|
|
|
I like the idea of a city sim starting out in the Industrial Revolution, or the Old West, or something: mass migration is just becoming a thing, and as luck would have it this patch of land has untapped natural resources. Start out with a long, straight wagon-path from the next town over, place a General Store, and watch as people start trickling into your settlement. Then, as time goes on, you 'zoom out' a little with each new technological era (steam power, electrification, etc) or population cap, right up to the modern age; so instead of managing 'cities' you're managing the individual settlements that form boroughs of a city. I know I've banged on about it itt, but it'd be nice to have a game framed as managing a city's history, instead of its power lines, water pipes, and budgets. Sort of an organic intelligent design process, instead of being an omnipotent God-mayor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 19:04
|
|
so I could say that I finally figured out what this god damned cube is doing. Get well Lowtax.
|
I just hope one day we finally get some sort of city simulator that isn't entirely based on 1960's style euclidean zoning and a near total focus on movin' cars around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
I'm the opposite, I want to play the alt-reality city sim where early- and mid-century assumptions about city planning and metropolitan design turn out to be 100% true and the more highways and carparks and suburbs you have the happier your citizens get. Dapper gentlemen in 5th Avenue suits explain it all to you in snappy news reel voices.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
spincube posted:I like the idea of a city sim starting out in the Industrial Revolution, or the Old West, or something: mass migration is just becoming a thing, and as luck would have it this patch of land has untapped natural resources. Start out with a long, straight wagon-path from the next town over, place a General Store, and watch as people start trickling into your settlement. Then, as time goes on, you 'zoom out' a little with each new technological era (steam power, electrification, etc) or population cap, right up to the modern age; so instead of managing 'cities' you're managing the individual settlements that form boroughs of a city. I would be about 5000% on board with this game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 22:38
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I just hope one day we finally get some sort of city simulator that isn't entirely based on 1960's style euclidean zoning and a near total focus on movin' cars around. The real end game of C:S is getting your population to stop driving.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 22:40
|
|
|
A city sim with a tech tree / era system like in Tropico could be cool. Honestly I've been mulling over making my own city simulator game. I have the programming skills to do it for sure but I don't know if I have the game design skills to make it fun e: Does anyone remember the really old LP Grand Fromage did of SC4 where they built the region up slowly over time as it might have happened historically? I want that, but enforced by game mechanics
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2019 23:36
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:The real end game of C:S is getting your population to stop driving. Im in the process of making a city that's all driving. All zoning is separated by type and you can't walk anywhere. There's a highway connecting all of them with a monstrous interchange in the middle. A cloverleaf doesn't even begin to accommodate the traffic. I need 30u diameter traffic circles just to feed it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lskXJ3_Jybo Congrats to fellow goon donoteat for making it big.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lskXJ3_Jybo It's hard seeing donoteat not being a 60+ Mr. Plinket lookin' dude.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 04:11
|
|
|
My perfectly smooth brain decided that I should train a couple of neural networks to help me make a terrain theme to go along with the neural network I trained to help me make heightmaps.  This is the most pointless thing that I do not regret doing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:06
|
|
|
Next make it generate appropriate flora and fauna
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:52
|
|
|
spincube posted:I like the idea of a city sim starting out in the Industrial Revolution, or the Old West, or something: mass migration is just becoming a thing, and as luck would have it this patch of land has untapped natural resources. Start out with a long, straight wagon-path from the next town over, place a General Store, and watch as people start trickling into your settlement. Then, as time goes on, you 'zoom out' a little with each new technological era (steam power, electrification, etc) or population cap, right up to the modern age; so instead of managing 'cities' you're managing the individual settlements that form boroughs of a city. I think one of the potential benefits of having a city sim where history progresses is that disasters become less annoying and more interesting. If you couple them with mechanics where it's hard to demolish existing buildings/roads because of cost or popular unrest etc, then disasters become an opportunity to redo earlier areas. In addition, one of the annoying parts of disasters is that they just force you to repeat the same actions to rebuild the damage, and if the game changes mechanically as history progresses it avoids that issue, with the player having different choices in rebuilding in era Y than they did when they built the area originally in era X.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:32
|
|
|
You guys remember a guy making a procedural city simulator game, even had account on these forums, and showed off videos and such? I forgot his name, or the name of the game. Anyone have bells ringing?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:52
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:You guys remember a guy making a procedural city simulator game, even had account on these forums, and showed off videos and such? I forgot his name, or the name of the game. Anyone have bells ringing? "Citybound" I think. European guy, very flat 2d sort of artstyle. I haven't seen that thread in years so I dunno if he's still working on it
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 10:55
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:"Citybound" I think. European guy, very flat 2d sort of artstyle. I haven't seen that thread in years so I dunno if he's still working on it A quick search and: he is. I thought he quit it because 'development takes longer than anticipated' or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 11:55
|
|
|
Red Bones posted:I think one of the potential benefits of having a city sim where history progresses is that disasters become less annoying and more interesting. If you couple them with mechanics where it's hard to demolish existing buildings/roads because of cost or popular unrest etc, then disasters become an opportunity to redo earlier areas. In addition, one of the annoying parts of disasters is that they just force you to repeat the same actions to rebuild the damage, and if the game changes mechanically as history progresses it avoids that issue, with the player having different choices in rebuilding in era Y than they did when they built the area originally in era X. OwlFancier posted:I'd also like if they maybe detached things from roads a little bit. Like instead of each individual building being simulated perhaps you can simulate things per city block, with blocks having entrances and internal networks like parks, but the actual agent accessibility is just calculated on whether you can get access to the block with the internal accessibility being a function of minor roads and paths but it being statistically simulated. 1: City 2: District 3: Neighborhood 4: Block Say we have an agent that wants to go from District A to District K. The pathfinder first checks whether the two districts neighbor each other. They do not, so the pathfinder starts looking at top tier roads, meaning highways or major multi lane roads, looking for the fastest connection between the two districts. It completely ignores lower tier roads unless no connection can be found, in which case it incorporates mid level roads into the search too. When a connection is found, a search of mid level roads and higher within the district are then used to find the fastest connection to the starting/destination neighborhood, and then within the neighborhood the lowest levels of roads are incorporated to connect to their block. If the destination administrative level borders the one the journey starts from, then the pathfinder calculates the route as if they were in the same administrative level - so you don't have agents from two neighboring blocks go by highway to each other just because they happen to be on opposite sides of a district border. Obviously such a system would give the player a lot more control over how agents use the roads, but that probably wouldn't be a bad thing - the pathfinder would basically be encouraged to act in a way the human player finds logical, since the pathfinder would be working within a hierarchy of connections and subdivisions that the player defined. And by making this hierarchy, computation speeds could be massively improved, allowing the player to create truly massive cities where skyscrapers actually make sense. All that'd be missing then would be multi lane roads to actually have the lanes being used properly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 12:02
|
|
|
Also as a pet peeve it would mean you don't need to have trucks boop every individual 4 tile building every so often. Instead you can put loading docks that connect directly to the road, and then all the deliveries for the block drive into it and into a shed and despawn. Or even they don't despawn and you get to design loading bays and rail yards so they can pull up at points and load/unload given that the game does handle that kind of thing quite well if you turn road anarchy on. Opens up a lot more options like mall complexes all operating off the same loading dock, factories the same etc. Much more interesting buildings and complexes become possible and can have things like internal pedestrian pathability as a mechanic. You could simulate a block having a car park that has a certain capacity, cars come in and park there, then people walk around the internal areas of the block to do their business, then go back to the parking lot and leave through the car entrance. I again really like the traffic simulation and wouldn't at all mind the game sticking with that as the core thing but it falls down a bit when you're limited to having buildings touching roads that trucks have to nudge every so often.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 12:19
|
|
|
I want a full-capitalist city simulator where I sell off areas to private developers to promote growth who then overdevelop and complain endlessly about my streets being rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2019 00:09
|
|
|
Something hilariously stupid is about to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 23:42
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Something hilariously stupid is about to happen. The more I look at this the more confused I get
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Something hilariously stupid is about to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
So it turns out having 75% of traffic on the ring congests it pretty good, so I'll have to make even more ramps. Either I'm going to have to make it some sort of insane turbine interchange or it's going to go full spaghetti monster.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 00:35
|
|
|
The ring wants to be at least three lanes and the ramps need to probably be two. Essentially your straight over connections are three lanes for one direction, while the ring is handling Turbine would probably be your best option but you could also consider splitting it into two interchanges to spread the traffic out a bit. You may also have more luck if you feed the ring from the inside partially because a lot of your problem is also gonna be the huge amount of weaving coming from having so many on/off ramps in sequence on the same side. If you could put all the onramps on one side and all the off ramps on the other that'd probably work better. Have the inside lane for joining, middle lanes for travel, then outer lane for exiting. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 00:46 on May 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 00:40
|
|
|
Spacing out the intersection is not an option because the interchange specifically exists as a thought experiment to a what if question. I'm going to feed 10.5 tiles of city into it, you cannot drive into different zoning without using the interchange. The goal is simply to figure out the optimal traffic pattern for an interchange using C:S AI which behaves very differently than real life. Things like are left merges faster than right, lanes vs radius relations to traffic flow, separating trucks from other traffic, etc. This is the third iteration of this intersection, by the way. I feed it with 32 20u diameter highway traffic circles for scale. I got congested using 6.
um excuse me fucked around with this message at 01:28 on May 4, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Something hilariously stupid is about to happen. Glory to Tzeentch
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 06:27
|
|
|
John Murdoch posted:Glory to Tzeentch Had the same thought
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 18:13
|
|
|
That reminds me of the M25 bit in Good Omens... wonder if it makes it into the TV series.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2019 09:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:21 |
|
|
CO is announcing something for C:S in about two hours. It looks like a school/university DLC incorporating the park/industry system.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2019 13:56
|
|