Moderator: Graphics Moderators
Something in this direction (very hasty mock-up)?FooBar wrote:I think "underneath" will be a bit difficult, because there actually is no "underneath". But I think there are some optical tricks to create an "underneath".
This is what happens in MB's stations set isn't it - more platforms can equal some differences as I recall (selecting "platform" over 3+ width creates a subway, doesn't it?)AndersI wrote:It would need a lot of coding for the ends and sides, different sprites if one, two or more platforms etc. but I think it is possible (assuming that the GRF code can get all that information).
no maglev fences, no maglev road crossings, maglev track passes over ordinary track with no bridge, maglev tunnels, new sprite arrangements...Dave Worley wrote:What changes?
Hmm, maybe NewBridges could illustrate it too:wallyweb wrote:Seeing as how you will be relying upon illusion, bridges may be a bit of a challenge. It seems to me that the original TT (not deluxe) had an interesting monorail bridge. Unfortunately I don't have it installed and my CD is buried somewhere only an archaeologist could find it, so I can't produce an image.
Portuguese 
Belarusian Damn, I just did one very similar and you beat me. Bugger. I was going to say that the station would be very easy to produce, you just need to have the track at the 'front' of the tile as the illusion imitates.AndersI wrote:...[A very good station example]...
Problem is that station tiles are 3D, but "track" in stations is "flat" - it´s in the ground tile. Consequently, you´ll need to make your station tiles also "flat", because if they´d remain 3D you´ll get unwanted clipping effects. OTOH, making stations tiles "flat" instead of 3D would generate lots of other problems, e.g. with fitting them together, clipping problems with neighbour buildings, etc, pp.AndersI wrote:It would need a lot of coding for the ends and sides [...]
That indeed would be the easy way, but since easy is not in my dictionary, I'll try the hard way first.michael blunck wrote:Best thing would be to have a low track, TR track doesn´t need to be elevated:
Probably not, because the 'normal' straight tracks are used in stations too. I'll work something out, eventually.Dave Worley wrote:You could have a station piece that drops the raised track to a lower level in terms of the image?
IMO the 'simple' solution is to only allow single track stationsmichael blunck wrote:Problem is that station tiles are 3D, but "track" in stations is "flat" - it´s in the ground tile. Consequently, you´ll need to make your station tiles also "flat", because if they´d remain 3D you´ll get unwanted clipping effects. OTOH, making stations tiles "flat" instead of 3D would generate lots of other problems, e.g. with fitting them together, clipping problems with neighbour buildings, etc, pp.
Is that possible GRF-wise? Otherwise one will have to enforce that manually.You shouldn't have any level crossings with a maglev. Period. Has to be manually enforced until there is a patch for it. Is it possible to 'fool the system' with the visual Z-level of a bridge without affecting the apparent level of the train? If so, one could make a 'flat looking bridge' for the crossings.Ben_K wrote: The problem tiles will of course be the level crossings, mainly because, if I remember correctly, they don't have multiple layers, they are single layer tiles.
Users browsing this forum: GarryG, Google [Bot] and 69 guests
