Height Maps from the APK

[Swift20B]

It's sad that PD forces you guys to put in more work to create roads than an engineer does in real life.

 

[P_eMmO_72]

We do get to have WAY more fun on ours though!

 

[eran0004]

It's sad that PD forces you guys to put in more work to create roads than an engineer does in real life.

They actually force us to put in less work, as there is no way of transforming the landscape.

 

[Swift20B]

They actually force us to put in less work, as there is no way of transforming the landscape.

Well, I can somewhat agree with you on your perspective. Although being an civil engineering student in highway/intersection design. The only hard work that I've experienced is the data collection of AADT values and a small pile of Calculus formulas and equations to calculate the path and grade of a road. Along with factors such as safety, which is kinda irrelevant for what most of us are aiming for (Touge's and race tracks).
Personally I think that PD should show some interest on integrating AutoCAD features into a "possible future TPE". That way, we as builder will have a much more interactive interface to allow us to build what we imagine or think of.

I've personally have seen other simulation games that allow you to build your own roads ( Ex: Race Track Builder). Sure, they are a crude form of what we ask for as a community. Yet, they have an advantage when compared to PD's TPE. PD should take inspiration from simulators such as those. As well as other racing simulators such as TXR, rFactor, LFS, Assetto Corsa, Project Cars, ETS, Car Mechanic Simulator, etc...

 

[eran0004]

.
Personally I think that PD should show some interest on integrating AutoCAD features into a "possible future TPE". That way, we as builder will have a much more interactive interface to allow us to build what we imagine or think of.

What AutoCAD features for example?

 

[Swift20B]

^The ability to view your work in a 3D interface. Currently, we have control over the X and Y values (Turn Radius and length). Yet, we have limited control over the Z value (Elevation). Right now, we have to go by the terrain given, which doesn't even correlate with the scenery. Hard work has produced topo maps which are a nice gift to go by.

Track items on the other hand is a topic of its own.

I feel like I'm preaching to the choir.

 

[eran0004]

^The ability to view your work in a 3D interface. Currently, we have control over the X and Y values (Turn Radius and length). Yet, we have limited control over the Z value (Elevation). Right now, we have to go by the terrain given, which doesn't even correlate with the scenery. Hard work has produced topo maps which are a nice gift to go by.

I don't think 3D would be of much use in this case. Landscapes tend to look awfully flat in 3D, and you get very little visual cues about the size and slope of a hill. It would be much better to simply show the contour lines of the terrain over the background, and perhaps display additional information about each road segment that you place, like elevation for instance. That is also something that could be added to the current application relatively easily.

 

[Swift20B]

path and grade of a road.

Yet, we have limited control over the Z value (Elevation).


I feel like I'm preaching to the choir.

We are literally agreeing on the same thing that adding control over Elevation is a must for any future versions of the TPE. Especially with the use of topo maps.
How we view the topo during construction is a personal preference. PD should take interest into implementing them is some way that can please most people.

Again, great work guys on the topo maps, they make a world of a difference when building courses.
Check mine out if you're interested. I post them on the database.