Coaster Smoothness

[BlackShark]

I disagree. The smoothing tool respects only the total length of a track section (measured along the track) and the 3D position of the "in" point of the most upstream piece of track you're currently smoothing.
However, if the track forms a complete circuit, then the ends of each piece can't move much if at all, so the length smoothed from vertical to horiztonal ends up going sideways, producing kinks.

No, it does not respect the total length. Just do a smooth on an entire hill (start horizontal, do a hill, up or down, return at the same height and horizontal) and use smooth on the entire hill : the selected piece of track will flatten and not move any piece of track outside the selected smoothed track : the overall track length will be shortened.
Same if you build a helix, it's especially obvious if you do a long 360° helix, the diameter of the track will shorten.

It's easy to demonstrate this phenomenon. Use 3 pieces of track all straight in the horizontal plane with the "out" point of the 3rd piece left free.

Now repeat the experiment, but this time add more track after the bunny hill to make a complete circuit back to the station. When you try to smooth out the hill, you can't get rid of it entirely and you'll introduce kinks elsewhere in the track as the track length that was originally in the hill searches in vain for a place to go.

I never use the smooth button on free pieces of track unattached at both ends. Mainly due to the "extend track" and the "in/out point" UI selector overlapping. I don't need to build the entire track but I always built at least one piece of track after the piece I want to smooth. This next piece (outside of the selection for smoothing) is never modified.
If the smooth button moves pieces of track outside your selected range, you have a big bug you should report.

However, if it does this on free pieces of tracks, then it would mean that the smooth button uses the parameters of the piece before the in point and after the out point as references, not the in and out parameters of the first and last selected pieces.

Hmmmm, so I guess all the perfectly smooth coasters I see on YouTube were built by hackers who added their own custom tools to the game but won't share them with the rest of us? It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools.

When I look at people's coasters on Youtube I see :
- A huge amount of junk coasters built by beginners who don't care about realism (too big, fast, ridiculous G force, neck breaking transitions, etc...)
(ok these should not count)
I see :
- A lot of failed attempts at smooth coasters (you can see they tried but it clearly did not work)
- Very few coasters that use very strict restrictions on simultaneously tilting, banking and rolling, and give a good illusion of smoothness but clearly not as smooth as real modern coasters (especially in roll)
- I have yet to see a single coaster with a smooth custom corkscrew/zero-G roll (not using the default 1-piece block)

 

[Chems]

Actually, the coaster builder itself provides all the tools to make smooth coasters. The problem lies in the incorrect banking of track pieces. As you can see in my original post from this thread, when you start banking a piece of track, the banking doesnt start at the beginning, and doesnt end at the ending. This causes the bumps which are almost impossible to smooth out. If the banking would be evenly distributed amongst the individual track pieces it wouldn't be very difficult to make smooth coasters.

 

[Chems]

This was a hard lesson for me to learn. I was expecting to build the track, wave a magic wand over it, and be done. But that isn't how it works. Instead, you have to realize that smoothing isn't a finishing touch, it's an essential ingredient from the get-go.

I disagree with the unsmoothness not being a problem of the game. This thread is about how banked pieces of track dont behave as they should behave. This causes coasters to be unsmooth. While ofcourse you need to put time in the coaster to make it smooth, this problem is just something the current smooth tools cant fix. While you can make smooth turns and stuff sometimes with the smoothtool, this is only possible in a few situations.

For instance, to make a simple turn you bank the track by from X degrees to Y degrees, then back to X. Now you can use the smooth tool to smooth the transitions between X and Y. But if you keep banking the track in the same direction like you would in a barrol roll for instance, the smooth tool cannot make these transitions smooth. Why? because the banking of a single track piece doesnt go from the beginning to the end (see pics in original post to see what I mean). This in turn causes 'straight' pieces of track between the different banked track pieces.

Hmmmm, so I guess all the perfectly smooth coasters I see on YouTube were built by hackers who added their own custom tools to the game but won't share them with the rest of us? It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools.

And a craftsman would be a fool to not admit his tool is broken.. Please link some of these perfectly smooth coasters because I havent seen them yet (and believe me when I say I have seen almost all coasters PoVs haha). Even Silvarrets coasters arent smooth really smooth. His wooden coaster uses the banking I described as above, and so does his vekoma coaster. And these two coaster types arent really designed to be smooth in real life anyway. Even in rct2 you could make a 'realistically smooth' vekoma coaster. [haha]

 

[Bullethead]

No, it does not respect the total length....

Well, in that case, it then respects NOTHING except the "in" point of the most upstream piece of track currently being smoothed. Everything else changes, and tracks do get longer as you smooth them, at least if the end is free. Observe video proof in this vid starting about 7:45.

I never use the smooth button on free pieces of track unattached at both ends.

There's your trouble (and also only using angle snap). Change what you're doing. If you've done the same thing n times and always gotten the same results, don't expect things to be different on then+1 attempt. I have no problem making smoother coasters than shown in your video on page 1 using the methods Silvarret describes in the vid linked here so I contend that there is nothing wrong with the game. Watch the above video to the end to see it in POV and judge for yourself.

When I look at people's coasters on Youtube I see :
- A huge amount of junk coasters built by beginners who don't care about realism (too big, fast, ridiculous G force, neck breaking transitions, etc...)
(ok these should not count)

Agreed. But hey, everybody has to start somewhere.

- I have yet to see a single coaster with a smooth custom corkscrew/zero-G roll (not using the default 1-piece block)

I guess you're not looking very hard.

Actually, the coaster builder itself provides all the tools to make smooth coasters. The problem lies in the incorrect banking of track pieces. As you can see in my original post from this thread, when you start banking a piece of track, the banking doesnt start at the beginning, and doesnt end at the ending. This causes the bumps which are almost impossible to smooth out. If the banking would be evenly distributed amongst the individual track pieces it wouldn't be very difficult to make smooth coasters.

Are you using the bank offset setting? I find that helps this a lot. Again, I learned this trick from @Silvarret. If you're only going to bank about 45^ in 1 piece of track, use a 1^ bank offset. If you're going to bank 90^ in 1 piece of track, use a 2^ offset. Then use the smoothing tool on those sections mostly individually and enjoy.

 

[funny_speed_spin]

Tips aside, back to the issue :
The reason building a smooth coaster in Planet Coaster is so hard is not due to user's no knowing all the advanced details of the builder : the real reason is that the current coaster builder was never designed to be smooth from the very start.
The current coaster builder is simply too limited : we are eyeballing the track layout, piece by piece, and we have no idea of what they actually feel like until after we try the ride in first person camera.
We build our layouts knowing it has rough transitions and then the smooth tool does not give us any control over the actual smoothness used (why would you have to press the smooth button 20 times ? why is it influenced by the number of pieces or by their angles ? Can't it just smooth it all in one go ?). And we have to eyeball our speeds and G forces until after the track is built and the test car has passed over the piece of track. We can't tell the builder to make a perfect constant -1G airtime hillcrest, we can't ask it adjust roll automatically for zero lateral G.
We can't build for an experience, we're stuck with eyeballing track pieces and then wait and hope for the best.

What we want is to achieve the perfect smoothness of CAD designed, machine precision engineered, modern coasters designed by companies such as Bolliger&Mabillard or Intamin, but the tools we are given to work with are only capable of doing Arrow/Vekoma 1980's style of track design.

If we want good smooth results, there's no way around it : we need better more advanced tools. The coaster builder needs to be redesigned to achieve "smooth-on-first-build".
(no more eyeball rough track build + smooth button later).

+1

Imagine.. Frontier really hasn´t planned to give us smoothe coaster in a new gen game of 2016. Or they simply underestimated it .. or .. they just named theire game Planet COASTER for fun.
Who knows!

And who knows.. maybeee.. the didn´t thought far enough to fix the problem after all and have to implement a NEW track system. If it should be better.
And if they do so .. no past build coaster could run anymore.

Just the coaster with the new AND AWESOME SMOOTH track system.

Would it be worth it to go this step forward? To destroy all coaster in parks because there is a new system which is budder smooth .. ?

EASY!?
ADVANCED!?
EVOLVED!?
SMOOTH!?

There is only one answer. YES.
It´s not a matter of work or .. biger changes.. it is a matter of prestige!

Note: That is my fear It is just a thought that was coming to my mind. But i think PC should finally open the hat and answering what is wrong with the system.

 

[Chems]

Are you using the bank offset setting? I find that helps this a lot. Again, I learned this trick from @Silvarret. If you're only going to bank about 45^ in 1 piece of track, use a 1^ bank offset. If you're going to bank 90^ in 1 piece of track, use a 2^ offset. Then use the smoothing tool on those sections mostly individually and enjoy.

Banking offset is used to create a heartlining effect. This has nothing to do with the smoothness of the track pieces itself. Also, can you link me to one of these perfectly smooth coasters?

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

+1

Imagine.. Frontier really hasn´t planned to give us smoothe coaster in a new gen game of 2016. Or they simply underestimated it .. or .. they just named theire game Planet COASTER for fun.
Who knows!

And who knows.. maybeee.. the didn´t thought far enough to fix the problem after all and have to implement a NEW track system. If it should be better.
And if they do so .. no past build coaster could run anymore.

Just the coaster with the new AND AWESOME SMOOTH track system.

Would it be worth it to go this step forward? To destroy all coaster in parks because there is a new system which is budder smooth .. ?

EASY!?
ADVANCED!?
EVOLVED!?
SMOOTH!?

There is only one answer. YES.
It´s not a matter of work or .. biger changes.. it is a matter of prestige!

Note: That is my fear It is just a thought that was coming to my mind. But i think PC should finally open the hat and answering what is wrong with the system.

I disagree that we need a completely new system for coaster building. The current system in place actually is very advanced and offers all the tools needed to create realistic and smooth coasters. The reason coasters currently are not smooth is NOT because the coaster builder is bad, but instead is due to a 'bug'. If the banking would be fixed you can make smooth coasters.

Aside from that, there are some improvements to the coaster builder I'd like to see. Mainly giving us more freedom in editing already placed track pieces. But the current banking issues are not caused by a lacking coaster builder system.

 

[Movielover]

Also, can you link me to one of these perfectly smooth coasters?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQkKo8-5IB4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-cbDgNnu8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smyeWWYW6N4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJrfWwbA5m4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxeGqAh8cZQ

Not even 5 minutes of Youtube searching...

 

[BlackShark]

I disagree that we need a completely new system for coaster building. The current system in place actually is very advanced and offers all the tools needed to create realistic and smooth coasters. The reason coasters currently are not smooth is NOT because the coaster builder is bad, but instead is due to a 'bug'. If the banking would be fixed you can make smooth coasters.

I also disagree that the current coasters should be trashed. But for a very different reason.
The devs could perfectly keep the current rides and current coaster builder for backwards compatibility, and add a new type of attraction called the "advanced coaster" with a completely new building system.


The coaster builder is NOT designed to produce advanced tracks. It's designed to be simple enough to be picked up by beginners, yet advanced enough to let our imagination run wild.
(and as a bonus not to difficult to program for Frontier devs)
It's a simplified coaster builder designed to not overwhelm the users questions about what they want to do.
It's a one size fits all.
It's good at everything but excels at nothing.

It's a choice Frontier made. And we have to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tools Frontier provided us.
The banking step in the current coaster builder is not a bug, it's a feature.
It does not linearise/delete the banking node because beginners select their entire track and press the smooth button hoping the button will magically make their track "smooth".
Frontier decided to implement a single smooth button that suits both situations (which are completely different and NOT compatible with each other) and implemented a one-size-fits-all smooth function that does neither jobs, but something in-between.

Again : it's not a bug, it's a feature.
The coaster builder was designed to be this way, and this is why it's impossible to achieve the smoothness that we want.

 

[Aaronroberts12567]

I've said before, there should be alternative track for custom inversions that smooth out in a different way, and the ability to save custom inversions.

 

[BlackShark]

I've said before, there should be alternative track for custom inversions that smooth out in a different way, and the ability to save custom inversions.

I like the idea.
It could be as simple as a separate smooth button.
Or a checkbox that unlocks an "advanced track editor" mode.

 

[Chems]

It's a choice Frontier made. And we have to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tools Frontier provided us.
The banking step in the current coaster builder is not a bug, it's a feature.
It does not linearise/delete the banking node because beginners select their entire track and press the smooth button hoping the button will magically make their track "smooth".
Frontier decided to implement a single smooth button that suits both situations (which are completely different and NOT compatible with each other) and implemented a one-size-fits-all smooth function that does neither jobs, but something in-between.

I am sorry, but that doesnt make any sense. Why would they ever implement the current banking as a feature? It just adds unnecessary frustration to make a smooth coaster. Making coasters would be easier if the banking behaves as it should behave. Also, making the banking behave properly doesnt make the coaster builder more complex. Quite the opposite actually, since you wouldnt need the smoothtool nearly as often.

I just cant see any situation that would justify the current banking system as a feature.

 

[breezerHOG1]

The coaster builder is NOT designed to produce advanced tracks. It's designed to be simple enough to be picked up by beginners, yet advanced enough to let our imagination run wild.

I think I finally figured out how to describe the dilemma I have with PC. In another thread, somebody asked me how I can say the game is both "too easy" and "too complex" at the same time. IMO PC is a big step up from RCT3 in regards to the challenge of building a coaster for a new or novice player. I am not one of the coaster enthusiasts who knows anything about the structure of a coaster. When I started playing RCT1 as a kid I had a tough time making a coaster with a loop and mostly stuck to wooden coasters until I got the hang of things.

Here is what is great and wrong with PC at the same time. The game does not know what its main focus is, and it doesn't play to its strengths. In Alpha 1, coaster building was hidden behind a "cheat code" to unlock it, and to this day our Community Creations is filled with mostly scenery. I have seen threads discussing this, but the "novice" players are often dismissed by the most experienced players here.

PC needs to understand how RCT1 worked. I recently read the interview between Chris Sawyer and Chris Sawyer. Even Chris Sawyer admits that Chris Sawyer did a better job on RCT1 levels than Rct2. Why is that? Well its the Progression System of the Gameplay. RCT1 understood how new players would approach the game, where as its sequels have failed in that regard.

PC offers new players the ability to jump in and build amazing designs in the terrain, modular building if thats what they want. And PC offers players the ability to manage flat rides, if thats what they want. There is so much variety that it has lost its attention to the main focus on the game, and that should be building coasters.

What the game is right now is a model kit, and for many people that is all it needs to be. But almost all "Games" these days have some sort of progression, and there are a few threads around here about how PC has a bad progression system, because it does not focus on coaster building.

From a novice players perspective, the game should begin by giving the player (in career mode) very simple coaster pieces (such as a junior coaster, no loops) to start off with, before unlocking something a bit more challenging. Objectives should be primarily focused on achieving specific coaster goals, obviously that is there, but its the progression that isnt right. It needs to go step by step through the entire coaster building process for players to jump in to such a task.

 

[BlackShark]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQkKo8-5IB4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-cbDgNnu8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smyeWWYW6N4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJrfWwbA5m4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxeGqAh8cZQ

Not even 5 minutes of Youtube searching...

Some quality Arrows type of smoothness thanks to extremely long constant curves with almost no transitions.
The two twisty coasters in your list would be world class head-bangers. As soon as there is a transition you can clearly see the steps and instant curvature changes.
It's a fine result for a fantasy game, the illusion is clearly there, but it's not good enough for the modern coaster enthusiast.

Just search for anything made with NoLimits 2, every coaster on the first results page blows any of these coasters in transition smoothness with 10 times the twistiness.
The only problem : well it's NoLimits (it's an ultra-focused CAD-like simulator game with a steep learning curve, not an *cough* "accessible" and *cough* "fun" game like Planer Coaster)

I am sorry, but that doesnt make any sense. Why would they ever implement the current banking as a feature? It just adds unnecessary frustration to make a smooth coaster. Making coasters would be easier if the banking behaves as it should behave. Also, making the banking behave properly doesnt make the coaster builder more complex. Quite the opposite actually, since you wouldnt need the smoothtool nearly as often.

I just cant see any situation that would justify the current banking system as a feature.

You're thinking like an advanced user who knows how to design a coaster. You're not looking at the beginner user who designs random pieces of track and presses the smooth button not even knowing how it's supposed to work.
Frontier chose to implement a single smooth button that should work for both types of users. Yes, I know : it's not possible. The same tool you want cannot possibly be the same tool that beginners would need to magically fix their mistakes. But that's exactly what Frontier chose to do. And that's why the smooth button keeps the nodes as steps.

 

[Chems]

I think I finally figured out how to describe the dilemma I have with PC. In another thread, somebody asked me how I can say the game is both "too easy" and "too complex" at the same time. IMO PC is a big step up from RCT3 in regards to the challenge of building a coaster for a new or novice player. I am not one of the coaster enthusiasts who knows anything about the structure of a coaster. When I started playing RCT1 as a kid I had a tough time making a coaster with a loop and mostly stuck to wooden coasters until I got the hang of things.

Here is what is great and wrong with PC at the same time. The game does not know what its main focus is, and it doesn't play to its strengths. In Alpha 1, coaster building was hidden behind a "cheat code" to unlock it, and to this day our Community Creations is filled with mostly scenery. I have seen threads discussing this, but the "novice" players are often dismissed by the most experienced players here.

PC needs to understand how RCT1 worked. I recently read the interview between Chris Sawyer and Chris Sawyer. Even Chris Sawyer admits that Chris Sawyer did a better job on RCT1 levels than Rct2. Why is that? Well its the Progression System of the Gameplay. RCT1 understood how new players would approach the game, where as its sequels have failed in that regard.

PC offers new players the ability to jump in and build amazing designs in the terrain, modular building if thats what they want. And PC offers players the ability to manage flat rides, if thats what they want. There is so much variety that it has lost its attention to the main focus on the game, and that should be building coasters.

What the game is right now is a model kit, and for many people that is all it needs to be. But almost all "Games" these days have some sort of progression, and there are a few threads around here about how PC has a bad progression system, because it does not focus on coaster building.

From a novice players perspective, the game should begin by giving the player (in career mode) very simple coaster pieces (such as a junior coaster, no loops) to start off with, before unlocking something a bit more challenging. Objectives should be primarily focused on achieving specific coaster goals, obviously that is there, but its the progression that isnt right. It needs to go step by step through the entire coaster building process for players to jump in to such a task.

Thats an interesting thought.

The coaster builder may be a lot more difficult for new players, but that is not really a bad thing. I agree there could perhaps be better tools to teach new players about the coaster builder and different coaster types. Maybe with a scenario like you described from RCT1 where you start with a simple coaster and slowly unlock more advanced coasters. Ahh.. RCT1. I still remember building my first big coaster. Coasters were really the ultimate ride to build in that game, like, its main focus almost. Planet coaster has spread this focus to other parts of the game like the terrain editor.

I totally agree with you that the same feeling of progression you had in RCT1 isnt in planet coaster.

That all said, this thread really isnt about the difficulty of the coaster builder. I actually think it found the perfect balance of difficulty and flexability. Right inbetween RCT3 and NoLimits. As someone who has played alot of NoLimits I dont mind it getting more advanced option tho. [haha]

I also want to point out that there is nothing wrong with the coaster builder as a whole. Just one part of the builder doesnt work correctly: the banking. That is, as far as I can tell, the only real issue the coaster builder has, and I refuse to believe it is a 'feature' of the coaster builder.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Some quality Arrows type of smoothness thanks to extremely long constant curves with almost no transitions.
The two twisty coasters in your list would be world class head-bangers. As soon as there is a transition you can clearly see the steps and instant curvature changes.
It's a fine result for a fantasy game, the illusion is clearly there, but it's not good enough for the modern coaster enthusiast.

Just search for anything made with NoLimits 2, every coaster on the first results page blows any of these coasters in transition smoothness with 10 times the twistiness.
The only problem : well it's NoLimits (it's an ultra-focused CAD-like simulator game with a steep learning curve, not an *cough* "accessible" and *cough* "fun" game like Planer Coaster)


You're thinking like an advanced user who knows how to design a coaster. You're not looking at the beginner user who designs random pieces of track and presses the smooth button not even knowing how it's supposed to work.
Frontier chose to implement a single smooth button that should work for both types of users. Yes, I know : it's not possible. The same tool you want cannot possibly be the same tool that beginners would need to magically fix their mistakes. But that's exactly what Frontier chose to do. And that's why the smooth button keeps the nodes as steps.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I have a feeling you dont understand what the issues is this thread is about. It is not about the smooth tool smoothing the wrong way. The smooth tool actually works pretty good.

Now, the real issue is that the banking of a track piece itself doesnt work correctly (as shown in the pictures and videos of the original post). This has nothing to do with the smooth tool. Why would anyone, from a novice to experienced builder want the track to behave this way? Because the way I see it, it only makes it more difficult. Especially for people who dont know how to properly use the smooth tools.

The reason I mentioned the smooth tool in the first place is because these dents caused by the incorrect banking are often so severe the smooth tool cant even get rid of them. But the issue here is really not about the smooth tool. It is also not about the coaster builder not being advanced enough. It is only about a part of the coaster builder (banking) not working correctly.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQkKo8-5IB4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-cbDgNnu8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smyeWWYW6N4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJrfWwbA5m4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxeGqAh8cZQ

Not even 5 minutes of Youtube searching...

All those coasters have the exact problem this thread is about? All of them have jerky transistions between different banked elements.

 

[BlackShark]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I have a feeling you dont understand what the issues is this thread is about. It is not about the smooth tool smoothing the wrong way. The smooth tool actually works pretty good.

Now, the real issue is that the banking of a track piece itself doesnt work correctly (as shown in the pictures and videos of the original post). This has nothing to do with the smooth tool. Why would anyone, from a novice to experienced builder want the track to behave this way? Because the way I see it, it only makes it more difficult. Especially for people who dont know how to properly use the smooth tools.

The reason I mentioned the smooth tool in the first place is because these dents caused by the incorrect banking are often so severe the smooth tool cant even get rid of them. But the issue here is really not about the smooth tool. It is also not about the coaster builder not being advanced enough. It is only about a part of the coaster builder (banking) not working correctly.

No, the smooth button does not work well.
If it did, we would only need to press it once and the game would instantly zero-in on the smooth track design we want.
Instead, it only does part of the job and we have to press the ❤︎❤︎❤︎❤︎ button dozens of times to get a close enough approximate of what we ask, but never actually get.

The smooth functions are intimately tied to the issue at hand here.
The issue of this thread is that the game does not produce smooth continuous rolls when rolling across multiple track elements.
You can only build a smooth roll transition if it is made of one single track element due to the stepping at each node.
This is the correct behaviour of the track builder since it doesn't know if you want to do with these rolls (it doesn't ask). So the self-contained single piece roll with a 0 roll rate at each end is the best possible guess.

In order to avoid the stepping at each node, there are 2 possible solutions :
-solution 1 : add buttons that allows the user to tell the builder whether each track section is a self-contained roll or a multi-part beginning/middle/end of roll. These are 4 buttons that need to be added to the interface, and one of which should be pressed every time you modify the roll rate.
-solution 2 : use the smooth button on the multi-part section to tell the game that the roll should be continuous over the entire selected pieces of track (what I wish the smooth roll button could do)

Frontier chose none of these solutions because (my guess) :
-the first overloads the interface with buttons that would scare beginners
-the second would instantly turn the entire ride flat when beginners misuse the smooth buttons on the entire turn (from start to finish of the turn, or worse : the entire track)

So we're stuck with this frustrating system where it's impossible to get smooth long rolls across multiple pieces of track, because Frontier built it that way.
What this thread is asking is not a bug fix, it's a new feature.

 

[MARK1]

I'm a life-long coaster enthusiast and avid No Limits player and I'm so happy with what we got in the coaster builder. I'm happy because I believe that No Limits is it's own game for a reason... to expect a game that includes the complexity of No Limits as well as the other tools/simulation that the average theme park game/Planet Coaster offers is a bit much to me.

Yeah there are imperfections in the builder but I get pretty darn close to anything I want to create (and they're pretty specific), and to have a whole theme park/crowd simulated around it is just a pleasure.

Perhaps they can sort out the banking issues though.... it seems like a powerful engine.

 

[Chems]

No, the smooth button does not work well.
If it did, we would only need to press it once and the game would instantly zero-in on the smooth track design we want.
Instead, it only does part of the job and we have to press the ❤︎❤︎❤︎❤︎ button dozens of times to get a close enough approximate of what we ask, but never actually get.

I guess that depends on how you feel the smooth tool should work. But that is a whole different topic.

The smooth functions are intimately tied to the issue at hand here.
The issue of this thread is that the game does not produce smooth continuous rolls when rolling across multiple track elements.
You can only build a smooth roll transition if it is made of one single track element due to the stepping at each node.
This is the correct behaviour of the track builder since it doesn't know if you want to do with these rolls (it doesn't ask). So the self-contained single piece roll with a 0 roll rate at each end is the best possible guess.

Wrong. It doesnt matter if you want you next track piece to continue the roll or not. Let me give you an example:

1. Current banking situation: We have track piece A and B. Track piece A starts to bank 40 degrees. Track piece B doesnt continue the banking and keeps it at 40 degrees. Now, with the smooth tool you can easily make the transition between A and B smooth, despite the incorrect banking behaviour.
   
2. Fixed banking situation: Now if we do the same but with the fixed banking, what will happen? Track piece A starts banking 40 degrees. Track piece B stays 40 degrees. Now you already have a somewhat smooth transition, and we havent even used the smoothtool yet! Now with some smooth tool magic we have a way better and smoother transition between A and B.

So what you are suggesting doesnt matter if the next piece after a roll doesnt continue banking.

On the other hand, what if trackpiece B banks to 80 degrees instead of staying at 40? Well, in situation 1 you would get the jerky transition we have in game right now. In situation 2 however, the transition would be smooth.

In order to avoid the stepping at each node, there are 2 possible solutions :
-solution 1 : add buttons that allows the user to tell the builder whether each track section is a self-contained roll or a multi-part beginning/middle/end of roll. These are 4 buttons that need to be added to the interface, and one of which should be pressed every time you modify the roll rate.
-solution 2 : use the smooth button on the multi-part section to tell the game that the roll should be continuous over the entire selected pieces of track (what I wish the smooth roll button could do)

These solution could work, but you forgot the most obvious solution: let the banking of a track piece start at the beginning of the piece, and let it end of the piece. It would make any transition smoother, no matter what crazy curved and banked pieces you put after it.

What this thread is asking is not a bug fix, it's a new feature.

This thread is asking to fix a problem with the banking of track pieces. There is no way this was an intended feature. It just doesnt make sense.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I'm a life-long coaster enthusiast and avid No Limits player and I'm so happy with what we got in the coaster builder. I'm happy because I believe that No Limits is it's own game for a reason... to expect a game that includes the complexity of No Limits as well as the other tools/simulation that the average theme park game/Planet Coaster offers is a bit much to me.

Yeah there are imperfections in the builder but I get pretty darn close to anything I want to create (and they're pretty specific), and to have a whole theme park/crowd simulated around it is just a pleasure.

Perhaps they can sort out the banking issues though.... it seems like a powerful engine.

Exactly. The coaster builder is way more advanced than people make it out to be. It's just a shame it has one big flaw: incorrect banking behaviour.

 

[hamcake]

On the other hand, what if trackpiece B banks to 80 degrees instead of staying at 40? Well, in situation 1 you would get the jerky transition we have in game right now. In situation 2 however, the transition would be smooth.

They actually changed this behavior awhile ago, if A banks to 40 degrees and B banks to 80 degrees it WILL adjust the transition between A and B to be smooth. I posted a video showing it in this thread. There are two big problems with the current system though, especially for custom inversions:

1. Any initial banking is still too abrupt. Piece A still has that small lead in before it starts banking, so if you have a continuous sequence A B C D all banking in the same increments, the entrance to A's and the exit from D's bank will be over a smaller distance so the sequence as a whole won't be paced correctly. This also applies if you change the banking direction, it will create a "stop banking" transition and a "start banking" transition which is that awkward stepping from before.

2. Any track length difference between the two pieces is not taken into account, it will make the exact same transition adjustments to the previous piece. This will really mess up pacing if you make for example a sequence A B C where A and C are the same length, the transitions will be a bit faster than the banking change on each piece.

 

[Chems]

They actually changed this behavior awhile ago, if A banks to 40 degrees and B banks to 80 degrees it WILL adjust the transition between A and B to be smooth. I posted a video showing it in this thread. There are two big problems with the current system though, especially for custom inversions:

You are absolutely right. I think I forgot about it since the amount it actually adjusts is so minimal.[big grin]

1. Any initial banking is still too abrupt. Piece A still has that small lead in before it starts banking, so if you have a continuous sequence A B C D all banking in the same increments, the entrance to A's and the exit from D's bank will be over a smaller distance so the sequence as a whole won't be paced correctly. This also applies if you change the banking direction, it will create a "stop banking" transition and a "start banking" transition which is that awkward stepping from before.

2. Any track length difference between the two pieces is not taken into account, it will make the exact same transition adjustments to the previous piece. This will really mess up pacing if you make for example a sequence A B C where A and C are the same length, the transitions will be a bit faster than the banking change on each piece.

These two points are exactly what is wrong with the banking. Id love to hear from a dev about this particular issue. It seems like it is not an easy fix, since its in the game since the very first day of alhpa.

 

[BlackShark]

Wrong. It doesnt matter if you want you next track piece to continue the roll or not. Let me give you an example:

1. Current banking situation: We have track piece A and B. Track piece A starts to bank 40 degrees. Track piece B doesnt continue the banking and keeps it at 40 degrees. Now, with the smooth tool you can easily make the transition between A and B smooth, despite the incorrect banking behaviour.

So what you are suggesting doesnt matter if the next piece after a roll doesnt continue banking.

This thread is asking to fix a problem with the banking of track pieces. There is no way this was an intended feature. It just doesnt make sense.

They actually changed this behavior awhile ago, if A banks to 40 degrees and B banks to 80 degrees it WILL adjust the transition between A and B to be smooth. I posted a video showing it in this thread.

I tested this yesterday. I used the wing coaster since it's extra width makes roll rates highly visible. I don't see what you describe.
It behaves like I described :

A single piece changing bank is smooth at the entry and smooth at the exit. ("smooth" curves but the feeling of smoothness is relative to the length of the piece of track you used of course)
If you chain multiple pieces : you get stepping due to the zero roll rate at each node.
If you press the smooth bank button, it will progressively change the bank nodes so that the overall roll is more continuous (equalize the roll over the nodes), but it does not modify the stepping (each node still has a roll rate of zero).

In the A = 40°, B = no change example :
On initial build, the A piece smoothly transitions from it's initial state to +-40° , B doesn't change.
Press the smooth button while selecting the A&B pieces, and the more you press the button, the more the AB transition progressively changes to reach approx 20° (with a stepping effect due to the zero roll rate at the node).

I have not experimented with varying the track length.