Width of ride entrance/exit

Hi there,

So i'm building a ride station (a train station in this case) and i wanted to build a symmetrical entrance and exit.
Unfortunately they don't have the same with. The exist is exactly 1 block wide which is nice, but the entrance is smaller and it's impossible to align it to the walls next to it.

Or is this just me? It sometimes annoys me quite a bit :)



An image to show what i mean
 
Last edited:
Good lord that's bad.

I mean it's a minor thing, but JEEZ. That is bad. I had a problem making a symmetrical station and my solution was to give up, had I tried with a straight stairwell I would've seen what you've got here and figured out what was wrong.
 
There's an easy-peasy fix for this. It certainly isn't the major drama/ zombie apocalypse that FMX thinks it is [wink]

The narrowest settings for the normal path which is your exit path is 4m wide. The narrowest for a queue path is 2m. It looks like your queue path is set to 3m wide. If you make sure that your queue is 4m wide where it leads up and joins the station, you will get perfectly symmetrical entrances and exits. Just make sure the queue is already at 4m before you start the stairs (or slope) to the station otherwise it'll be narrower at one end than at the other.

Hope this helps. [up]
 
There's an easy-peasy fix for this. It certainly isn't the major drama/ zombie apocalypse that FMX thinks it is [wink]

The narrowest settings for the normal path which is your exit path is 4m wide. The narrowest for a queue path is 2m. It looks like your queue path is set to 3m wide. If you make sure that your queue is 4m wide where it leads up and joins the station, you will get perfectly symmetrical entrances and exits. Just make sure the queue is already at 4m before you start the stairs (or slope) to the station otherwise it'll be narrower at one end than at the other.

Hope this helps. [up]
But it looks ugly because it narrows at the entrance if you do thatt
 
This got me intrigued, so I thought I'd do a little experiment.

The width of the path has nothing to do with it being too long.
As the original poster was referring only to the width, that's what I was referring to. I'd not noticed the length. But as you made another sweeping statement, I thought I'd do a little experiment. (see below). I feel it's always good to check your facts first before declaring it to the world. [big grin]



But it looks ugly because it narrows at the entrance if you do thatt
I've got a work around that's easy. It's not perfect, but it should do.

Here's how it is on the first post with the 4m exit path and the 3m queue. Because of the building grid, it has the gaps between the walls and the path. Also, the queue is still two pieces long, like the exit, but it doesn't reach the ground.



FinalMantasy, I'm afraid the following proves you are completely wrong in your statement.
Here's the queue path set to 4m, like the exit. It has affected the length so that it reaches the ground like the exit so width DOES affect path length.
You can see where it widens as it joins the station. If you put your walls on the inside edge of the grid, it isn't as noticeable.



If you don't like the gap and you don't want to cover it with scenery, you can always do this:- Make a flat section where it joins the station.



And use one of the flat roof pieces as a path cover.
 
FinalMantasy, I'm afraid the following proves you are completely wrong in your statement.
Gee, if only he had known there was a workaround to the problem that leads to a rather so-so result he probably wouldn't have made such a heinous statement like something in PC being - dare I say it? - bad! Ha, you totally got him!
Or... would he? Come to think about it, they could've simply made the game so you didn't have to use a workaround for every single thing you want to do in the first place. Yep, I think I have to aggree, bad design.

[This game makes me sarcastic I guess.]
 
For real, I made a thread about how awful the path system is the other day and this is just another example of how you can't do what you want to do because they made awkward arbitrary decisions like "The queues should start at 3m and regular paths shouldn't be able to go that narrow" and "the length of a path is entirely depenent on the width of the path so good luck lining ❤❤❤❤︎ up with equal usage of different size pieces".
 
Good lord that's bad.

I mean it's a minor thing, but JEEZ. That is bad. I had a problem making a symmetrical station and my solution was to give up, had I tried with a straight stairwell I would've seen what you've got here and figured out what was wrong.
I know right, class action lawsuit incoming! The path system does need some big adjustments though. I kind of wish you could have what they already have, but with an option to do point to point and spline pieces if we so desire.
 
Last edited:
It is a silly design decision that I still don't understand mind. I like there is a work around but we should be needing to do this because we are just adding more things to resolve issues that should not exist.

Also why changing the width changes the length is beyond me. That seems bad and also something that is silly so again just seems arbitrary and something that just seems to be "because it is"

This is why the path system is such a mess.
 
It is a silly design decision that I still don't understand mind. I like there is a work around but we should be needing to do this because we are just adding more things to resolve issues that should not exist.

Also why changing the width changes the length is beyond me. That seems bad and also something that is silly so again just seems arbitrary and something that just seems to be "because it is"

This is why the path system is such a mess.
It's because the paths are circles from the beginning. If you use a 4m wide path, you'll get a 4m diameter circle. It's that way because of total freedom, so you can start of that circle and place the second part any direction you want. If you place an 8m wide path, you'll get a 8m diameter circle, so it is going to be 8m wide and 8m long.

I do however agree that this shouldn't happen when you place the path connecting to another path. This should be changed, especially because the entrance has a different width in comparison to the exit. Which I also do not like. The whole game is based upon a 4m width. Using that mandatory 3m width at the entrance is a really weird choice if you ask me. It can never allign with the rest of the game...
 
I know right, class action lawsuit incoming! The path system does need some big adjustments though. I kind of wish you could have what they already have, but with an option to do point to point and spline pieces if we so desire.
Exactly. There are far worst things happening in the world.

Gee, if only he had known there was a workaround to the problem that leads to a rather so-so result he probably wouldn't have made such a heinous statement like something in PC being - dare I say it? - bad! Ha, you totally got him!
Or... would he? Come to think about it, they could've simply made the game so you didn't have to use a workaround for every single thing you want to do in the first place. Yep, I think I have to aggree, bad design.

[This game makes me sarcastic I guess.]
Don't worry about it. Sarcasm is one of my specialties and is just another excellent service I provide.
You are right though. There are some design choices I don't understand, or particularly agree with so I have to try and work with what we have. Unfortunately, we have to use workarounds at the moment, so all I'm doing is trying to offer a bit of help for those having issues. They aren't necessarily fixing issues, but they are hopefully easing them.

For real, I made a thread about how awful the path system is the other day and this is just another example of how you can't do what you want to do because they made awkward arbitrary decisions like "The queues should start at 3m and regular paths shouldn't be able to go that narrow" and "the length of a path is entirely depenent on the width of the path so good luck lining ❤❤❤❤︎ up with equal usage of different size pieces".
I see that the forum has filtered what you said (again) with lovely hearts as you don't seem to have a filter yourself. I just want to say that the devs are kind, intelligent, passionate people who really love this genre and really believe in what they are trying to create. Do you respond to people who are borderline abusive towards you? I'm sure you'll get their attention far more if you wrote a bit more maturely and reasoned than being quite so aggressive and sweary.

But cutting through the carp (that's how you sneakily get round the forum's filters), you make some valid points. I don't think the path system is bad or awful, I actually like it, but it certainly isn't perfect and could do with a fair bit of improving. I've managed to get some really good shapes and plazas out of it. I completely agree with you about the default widths on the paths. That is probably my biggest gripe about the paths. The normal paths only getting down to 4m is one of those decisions I cannot see the logic in. That's pretty wide, especially for a walkway down from a coaster station. why not have it go down to 2m like the queue? I'm sure the coding is there as the queues can get that narrow.
Also, when you set your path length to 1m, it should be 1m no matter it's width.

But I think people are forgetting that they are still working on this game and they read the forums and listen to feedback. So what we have isn't set in stone, so as long as we're giving feedback in a level, reasoned way, we'll get listened to and then more chance of getting the changes people want.
 
Last edited:
It's because the paths are circles from the beginning. If you use a 4m wide path, you'll get a 4m diameter circle. It's that way because of total freedom, so you can start of that circle and place the second part any direction you want. If you place an 8m wide path, you'll get a 8m diameter circle, so it is going to be 8m wide and 8m long.

I do however agree that this shouldn't happen when you place the path connecting to another path. This should be changed, especially because the entrance has a different width in comparison to the exit. Which I also do not like. The whole game is based upon a 4m width. Using that mandatory 3m width at the entrance is a really weird choice if you ask me. It can never allign with the rest of the game...
OK, but the issue there then is that we select the length of said path from 1m to whatever it is which actually means it's from centre to centre we are really making them say 4m to 8m for every 1m length indicated. I hadn't really thought about it till now tbh. But in that case it would be better to denote path length as 1 unit to 10 units or whatever.
 
OK, but the issue there then is that we select the length of said path from 1m to whatever it is which actually means it's from centre to centre we are really making them say 4m to 8m for every 1m length indicated. I hadn't really thought about it till now tbh. But in that case it would be better to denote path length as 1 unit to 10 units or whatever.
Agreed. 1m in game seems to mean greatly different lengths for different things. Especially the terrain brushes!!!
 
But I think people are forgetting that they are still working on this game and they read the forums and listen to feedback. So what we have isn't set in stone, so as long as we're giving feedback in a level, reasoned way, we'll get listened to and then more chance of getting the changes people want.
I think in threads critisizing PC the problems are being played down. I don't understand why there is a need to defend the devs: "This is not the worst thing that ever has happened to humanity so stop complaining!"

It's not like we're talking about a few minor details. Aside of the graphics and animations department there is hardly an aspect of the game that seems to be finished regarding design and functionality. Paths is just one of the areas that need a major overhaul.

Don't you think the devs know what their "finished" product is and what it isn't? If they need to do more work on the game (we all aggree on this one) they should do that before they release it, don't you think. That the practise of releasing a game in whatever shape it is, is broadly accepted by the community, is baffling to me. Are customers really that simple? Do they not know by supporting this behaviour the devs won't have a reason to do it differently next time? Where are the folks capable of critical thinking?

I know in this regard Frontiers is not really different than any other studio/ publisher but that doesn't make it right. If I'm gonna buy a beta I want to know beforehand it's a beta I'm buying.

Eventually problems might get fixed and missing features might get implemented - or they might not. I already bought the game so I'm 100% at the mercy of Frontiers. If they decide to not re-do the path building - tough break.
 
Last edited:
. It's that way because of total freedom,
"Total freedom" such as "You can't make a path shorter than it is wide even though the game very much supports this behavior, just not by user control"

 
Last edited:
"Total freedom" such as "You can't make a path shorter than it is wide even though the game very much supports this behavior, just not by user control"

http://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/cache/db/d5/dbd57bcbb3fff7245025a39061012200.png
That is a very, very good point. We know that all the paths are made of short segments because when we delete them, even the 10m wide path that is laid down in really long sections has to be deleted in tiny, short pieces. If we could place them in these short sections, I think the whole path system would handle better and with more control. We wouldn't have so many obstruction issues when you're near an adjoining path. I also think it would make it easier for people who are struggling.

I think in threads critisizing PC the problems are being played down. I don't understand why there is a need to defend the devs: "This is not the worst thing that ever has happened to humanity so stop complaining!"
Not only have you misquoted me, but you've changed the context of what I was saying and completely missed my point as an added bonus. When I said , "Exactly. There are far worst things happening in the world." I was basically saying that there are more serious issues to worry about in the grand scheme of things than one stairway being slightly different to the one next to it. It was a very specific reference that was directly relevant to this thread (check out the start of it) before we all knocked it completely off topic. The original poster was having an issue so rather than just moaning about it without actually offering anything constructive, I decided to try to give a little help.

The "stop complaining" part certainly wasn't from my mouth. Complaining is something I encourage and I'm really quite good at. (I'm not typically British). It highlights points and issues that could otherwise not even be noticed by the vendor. But there's definitely a way to conduct yourself while doing it. This is why I've been saying to people that being shouty and aggressive and borderline abusive will not get themselves listened to. You wouldn't expect a total stranger on the street to go out of their way and give you directions when you're lost after you'd given them a mouthful of abuse, would you?

As for defending the devs, I would be the first to say if there was something I don't agree with. I completely get why the management fans feel short-changed at the moment. It does feel quite shallow and a little tedious and could really do with improvement, there's no denying it. But the bile that's going around the forums at the moment, especially when members are targeting other members just because of a different opinion cannot be justified.

Also we're so used to the Ataris and E.A.s that I think Frontier are being tarred with the same brush. But I think the reason I do speak out for them a bit is the fact that because I've spent time with them and watched them work, I think I have a different perspective. I don't have the luxury of viewing "The Devs" as a faceless, abstract concept that I could happily bash with a clear conscience. I've seen that they are real people. They're educated, intelligent, passionate people who work really hard and all put extra hours in because they want to get something else into the game. They believe in the product and they want it to be the best.

I'm quite happy to sit back and let them get on with it at the moment because I haven't been presented with any evidence so far to make me doubt their intentions. All the people insisting that they aren't listening to us and that the radio silence from them is very worrying seem to quickly and regularly forget this:- Pretty much everytime there's an update, the forums are filled with people saying that they can't believe "x" has been added and that "y" is a brilliant feature, that we never saw coming and there's so much in this update etc.

So if they aren't listening to us, then I don't care because they're clearly listening to someone who by coincidence, wants what we want.


It's not like we're talking about a few minor details. Aside of the graphics and animations department there is hardly an aspect of the game that seems to be finished regarding design and functionality. Paths is just one of the areas that need a major overhaul.

Don't you think the devs know what their "finished" product is and what it isn't? If they need to do more work on the game (we all aggree on this one) they should do that before they release it, don't you think. That the practise of releasing a game in whatever shape it is, is broadly accepted by the community, is baffling to me. Are customers really that simple? Do they not know by supporting this behaviour the devs won't have a reason to do it differently next time? Where are the folks capable of critical thinking?

I know in this regard Frontiers is not really different than any other studio/ publisher but that doesn't make it right. If I'm gonna buy a beta I want to know beforehand it's a beta I'm buying.

Eventually problems might get fixed and missing features might get implemented - or they might not. I already bought the game so I'm 100% at the mercy of Frontiers. If they decide to not re-do the path building - tough break.
The paths certainly need work. Have you offered your feedback and ideas for them to Frontier? Give them your perspective. You may have some brilliant solutions that they haven't even thought of. That's the benefit of a forum. When you're working on a creative project so closely, you don't always see solutions that someone on the outside does. And this is one thing that bugs me about certain posters here. They're quick to moan, but offer no feedback on why they think that or how they think it can be improved. All that is doing is clogging server space as it serves no purpose.

I agree completely about the culture of releasing unfinished games. Frontier said from well before Alpha was even released that PC would be an on-going project so the situation now is exactly what I expected it to be from way back then. That allowed me to make an informed decision whether to purchase before I did. As I said earlier, I haven't seen any evidence to make me worry about what's to come.

I apologize to Arkainium for completely derailing this thread.
 
This got me intrigued, so I thought I'd do a little experiment.



As the original poster was referring only to the width, that's what I was referring to. I'd not noticed the length. But as you made another sweeping statement, I thought I'd do a little experiment. (see below). I feel it's always good to check your facts first before declaring it to the world. [big grin]





I've got a work around that's easy. It's not perfect, but it should do.

Here's how it is on the first post with the 4m exit path and the 3m queue. Because of the building grid, it has the gaps between the walls and the path. Also, the queue is still two pieces long, like the exit, but it doesn't reach the ground.
http://i.imgur.com/qRMdaGW.jpg


FinalMantasy, I'm afraid the following proves you are completely wrong in your statement.
Here's the queue path set to 4m, like the exit. It has affected the length so that it reaches the ground like the exit so width DOES affect path length.
You can see where it widens as it joins the station. If you put your walls on the inside edge of the grid, it isn't as noticeable.
http://i.imgur.com/We2DpUg.jpg


If you don't like the gap and you don't want to cover it with scenery, you can always do this:- Make a flat section where it joins the station.
http://i.imgur.com/IqNHPip.jpg


And use one of the flat roof pieces as a path cover.
http://i.imgur.com/TY81ycL.jpg
Nice researching. I will be taking advantage of that
 
Top