Impossible time smoothing at point of connection...

Has anyone else noticed that if you disconnect a piece of the track in the middle of a layout to fix elements or whatever and then reconnect it, the point of connection acts TOTALLY differently than every other piece of track? The depumper tool does not work on this point of track (it pushes vertices closer together and creates spikes) and even trying to smooth by hand is incredibly difficult. The G-force comb doesn't appear to display correctly at a point of reconnection, for me. I could go on. It's almost singularly ruining some of my tracks because I get sick and tired of working on the same vertex for 40 minutes and eventually can't help but give up.

Actually, I should say that it is not just the middle of the layout but really any time two vertices are connected. I've just started working around this at the end point by making sure that both vertices are lined up and not banked but that's not always possible when making changes to the middle of a track.

Am I the only person experiencing this? Is there something I'm missing?

did you try adding a roll point and setting the value to "0" and selecting the "strict" option?

I'm not sure what you're asking? I mean, I know what you're asking but I'm not sure why I would do that in this case; my whole point in this thread is that it's really tricky reconnecting the track when it's not a straight piece or at 0 degrees banking. If you were asking if anything was set to strict that might have thrown off the roll, no, definitely not around that point. I basically only use the strict setting for brakes lift and station, personally.

I've never had any problem with reconnects, other than having to adjust the rolls. That was because I had changed the track, though, not because the reconnect was messed up.

Are you using enough vertices? More is almost always better. Each vertex greatly affects the sections of track between the the next 2 vertices in each direction, and slightly affects the 3rd in each direction. It's a lot easier to get curves correct when you have several vertices than when you only have a few.

it makes two vertices that are in the exact same place you have to delete one

the problem is it changes the weight of the node, if you then de-pump this node it changes any other nodes weight that you de-pumped. I have had this issue and it bugs me. I have not found anyway to lock the weight at 1, I will change it but, if you use the de-pump it changes it back.

Kyle, I definitely deleted the two vertices that are formed too close together; that's not the issue either.

Bobo I SHOULD have enough, a little hard to say for sure not like there's some magic number... but I've had no other issues in terms of making smooth track elsewhere so it would seem I've been on the right track in terms of the number of vertices. Also, I HAVE been using NoLimits from the very beginning Not like I'm the best builder out there but certainly by this point I've pretty much figured out the right amount of vertices to use.

Anyway, it's just still an issue. I was poking around again today on the same track in question and one thing I noticed is that even though the connection takes place in a wide turn, for some reason the lateral gs go from -.5 to +.3 almost immediately at the point of connection, no transition at all. None of the rolls are vertices are set to strict. Why would the laterals be doing this, if the track is turning in the same direction and the rolls are all fine? I have fooled around with the no-lateral G force option but it doesn't even minimize them at that point, so I had to set it by hand.

None of the rolls are set to vertical X-Y, none of them are strict, there should be enough vertices... Could the weight be effecting this? I didn't set any of the weight myself in this section, though, but they vary after being dempumped. Still, trying to depump actually causes a spike. I am really confused, it is almost starting to seem like a bug.

Richie, but how can the weight be the whole issue if it's not at other points in the coaster? Lots of time depumping will change the weight of some or all of the selected vertices, and I've been finding the dempumper to usually work brilliantly.

Originally posted by zacattack1104

Bobo I SHOULD have enough, a little hard to say for sure not like there's some magic number... but I've had no other issues in terms of making smooth track elsewhere so it would seem I've been on the right track in terms of the number of vertices. Also, I HAVE been using NoLimits from the very beginning Not like I'm the best builder out there but certainly by this point I've pretty much figured out the right amount of vertices to use.

Didn't mean to imply you didn't know what you are doing, but some people try to use as few vertices as possible, and that just doesn't give the best results. Wanted to make sure you weren't one of them.

I can't at all picture the problem you're having or why. I'd need the file to look at. I've never encountered anything like this.

No no Bobo, no worries. Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were implying anything. Just saying that at this point in my NL career I don't think the number of vertices are the issue because I've been playing so long I'm pretty consistent in how often I place vertices from track to track... it's always possible though. That was one of my first thoughts too, but yeah in general I am definitely someone who prefers to have more vertices than less, at least to a point.

I was finally able to get something somewhat reasonable in that section but these issues definitely remain and it took a lot of time considering there's still a pretty good jerk. pilot if you are willing to look at it I would be happy to send you the track file. Couldn't tell if that was a real offer or not.

The initial roll node, identified by the Green Cone, is indeed handled slightly differently than the other nodes on the track and may affect shaping if you place it indiscriminately in the middle of your layout. When you disconnect and reconnect track to fix an element, it's best to also disconnect a straight section, such as somewhere near your station, so that you can maintain the initial roll node at that point and not somewhere out in the middle of the track. Keep it on a straight section and you will not have to contend with it for shaping.

Maybe being able to freely place that little cone would be something we could get added. Seems a better solution then multiple disconnect/reconnects to get it positioned out of the way. Maybe just have it permanently attached to the exit of the loading station and never move.

Yeah, it's also not always possible to find an appropriate straight section nearby the place that the disconnect is needed. This has happened a number of times to me now (and now I know why) but in this particular case I was trying to fix track located in between two in-game FVD designed elements with no straight section in between them. In my case I would have had to save at least one of the elements, if not both, and then re-add them after fixing because the only straight section was before the first of the two FVD elements, and even that was not totally straight. Being that there weren't any problems with that section of the track I didn't feel the need to disconnect there-- now I know-- and it wasn't going to be possible without disconnecting.

I guess with the information that points of connection do indeed work somewhat differently than other sections of track, I'm just feeling like the ability to delete sections of track was touted as a big new feature of NL2, not being a real option in NL1. But it's barely worthwhile if they don't act the same as other pieces (or can't be placed independently/moved) and as of now must be done in a straight run to not totally ruin that piece of track. I agree with Bobo that his suggestion would be a welcome feature.

Phyter, is there anything you can tell us about how that cone actually DOES respond to bankings? Is there anything that can be done as the game is now to work around it somewhat, besides tweaking and tweaking and tweaking and looking at the section from all angles and possibly moving it elsewhere?

at least I feel a little better knowing it's not just me....

Now that we know the work around, just add a node (or use an existing one) near the exit of the station or in the station where it should be straight and level. Disco/reconnect there and force the cone to be in a section that won't show weirdness as bad.

Also, since it is a roll node, you can double click and play with the roll like all the other roll nodes.

Just a couple of thoughts, but it's good to know what causes it so we can work around it if we need to.

Yes Bobo I think you're first suggestion is the way to go, I'm going to try that now. Playing with the roll is obviously possible but it just doesn't ACT the right way no matter what roll I set it. I literally tried it in one degree increments between like -25 and -60 degrees (any more or less wouldn't be any better, it doesn't seem) and it's just a strange point.

But I am going to see if I can force it elsewhere. I wasn't really thinking that if I just disconnect at the end of the track and leave the current problem part connected that the cone should move; I think that's the solution to my particular problem. I'm going to try that now.

edit: that did it! I actually posted a thread in the hard at area, before fixing it... but it's not really noticeable in the photos. All is well now, it ended up being a pretty easy change. Just disconnected and reconnected in a straight piece around the final brake.