Originally posted by Gotenks06
Isn't it completely different to build a coaster mathematically, and to build it by hand and then heartline it?
Actually
not at all different, IMHO.
After all, you got the idea(s) of how your track should ride and look. For any particular desired ride-effect, there will be a certain shape to provide it. I personally don't consider it important whether that shape was carefully handcrafted or tediously made up with formulas. Both the handmade, as well as the calculated, in case to be heartlined later, both will have to provide the highest-quality path-input for the AHG anyway.
Now you could think that calculating a track should automaticaly give best smoothness and great elements, even something like a "coasteresque" appearance. Bummer! In fact it does just not. The level of mathemathical complexity required to model real-life track shapes usually by far exceeds what current NL-tools and E-formulas can provide (the publically available ones, at least...). Hence many "mathed" tracks out there do have this "stitchy" appearance, lacking the overall flow and missing fluent transitions. There are situations where careful handcrafting could do the better job, and faster.
So I'd say, the greatest challenge for you will be to transform your genuine ideas and feelings about a design into "working" track shapes, these resembling just what you want your riders to experience. By whatever way *you* will want to achieve that. And neither tools, nor craftsmanship will compensate for any lack of creativity or sensuality. So the "difference" between hand-building and mathing is just ony tiny variation within a way larger design process, and in the end it should not matter at all how it had been done in detail, but instead, how well each one utilized his very own talents.
just my two blue dots...
redunzelizer