(Archive) Advertising District / Montu - Busch Gardens, Tampa

in all honesty i think you're fighting a losing battle at this point. go ahead and prove me wrong if you like.

I don't think RMM was trying to be discouraging. He gave you a friendly warning that people are going to be very critical of your work here, and simply suggested (along with others) that you probably should start smaller, and work your way up with coaster layouts.

That first drop looks just plain awful. It needs to stay much tighter to the lift hill, which will bring the Immelman closer to the station as in real life. Next your barrel roll is going the wrong direction, and on the opposite side of the loop. I'm not sure exactly where you have it, but the MCBR should be perpendicular to the lift hill. There is no hill between the helix and the diagonal curve. Lastly, the upwards curve into the brake run needs to be right before it. The track is still in the ditch when it hits the first part of that 180.

Ever since trying the layout of Kumba Ive been trying to recreate various tracks, and Montu was one I tried. The layout I found to be difficult to nail with all the elements within their respective places, this is the layout I came up with.
[/img]

I think the MCBR is located right in front of the batwing.. Doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

Wolfman, you made the same mistake I did on my first try. The part following the second loop and helix goes under and on the other side of the Immelman dive out.

Take two of mine:


Verti, the problem is that the entire layout in real life is on a diagonal so there are a few adjustments that need to be made to account for that. Having the dive out of the batwing as a diagonal helps to set up the MCBR better to fit the second loop/helix sequence. It sucks that RCT doesn't have diagonal inversions. That would solve so many issues.

^I prefer your original MCBR & batwing. it flowed better.

Thank you for the Doom & Gloom report guys. (Remind me to tell them how much they suck on their topics.

To answer verti: The MCBR slows the trains by trimming off only 8 to 10 MPH, so the batwing can be built in a pit like it's supposed to be. If not, the trains would be going through the corkscrews at 46 MPH or so. Trains still run through at 36 MPH, and at the bottom of the batwing it's like 45 MPH. (if you rode Montu, you know that the batwing is a royal high G affair.)

The MCBR after the batwing is nearly a useless feature as I slow the trains by 4 MPH. Nearly insignificant.

I like that alteration you made there John. It seems to line up a lot better with the mechanical (drawing) submitted by Mavrick. And the curve over the photo track looks really good to me.

Yeah, I got to the point were the first 45 deg. left turn after the batwing and I just went... "Oooo-Kay? Now what? Because I can see that the second vertical loop is right under the barrel roll. So I have to push that side out a bit more, so the inversion is well inside the barrel roll. That means that the railroad helix would be better located.

Seems like everyone is taking the left turn after the batwing, and turning right 135 deg. for the drop into the vertical loop and helix in one form or another.

I'll head back to the shop and take another stab at it. Thanks for all the great input people. It's much appreciated.

I think a combination of Lowenaldo's and John's would work best.

Agreed^

I'd jump ship before it completely sinks wolfman, sorry man...

Maybe do another beamer? One that hasnt been tried before?

Heres a four way POV of V3.0

There are a few little quirks but they should be easily fixed.

The first drop still looks very awkward from basically all but one angle.

Your Immelman twists out the wrong direction and the track at the top shouldn't need to be banked.

The batwing looks like it would hurt like hell. There's no bunny hill and dip down into it, the track rises the entire way before entering the batwing.

The helix after the second loop shouldn't be directly beneath the zero-g roll.

And why, why, why the double station? If you're just going for something inspired by Montu, then I can understand if you want to have things a little off or different. If you want this to be a spot-on recreation, the double station has to go.

Overall, though, it's looking a lot better.

I'm gonna say it again Wolfman, IO don't mean to be "gloomy," but I think really should try recreating something else first. I would say start with something basic like an Arrow Corkscrew or B:TR. Heck, even a Vekoma Flying Dutchman Man. Once you can nail those types of production model coasters, then you can come back to this.

AS John, there still quite a few things that need fixing up:
1) Unbank the turn on the exit of the Immelman.
2) Turn the barrel roll on the Immelman the other way.
3) Fix the first drop, cause it looks awful except from that last angle.
4) The barrel roll still needs to go in the other direction
5) Get rid of the bunny hill before the batwing.
6) Bring the "railroad helix" out more so the downward slope is under the barrel roll
7) Add a straight piece of track between the corkscrew and the curve
B) Again, the upward curve into the brake run should be the second 90-degree piece IMO
9) Lose the double station. It seems you are going for a spot-on recreation (as best as RCT allows) if you are using Kumba's rec as inspiration.

EDIT: is a smiley, so I changed it to B.

Agreed. Big improvement over Mk:1 but still needs a lot of tweaking.

Yeah that first drop is just so unappealing.

I'm not giving up, although a number of people think I should. I really don't care what they think. One even tells me to give up, then offers suggestions for the track design. Do they want me to give up or keep working? Sounds like they're more confused about this than I am.

OK, I was following the blueprint submitted by Maverick, (thanks!) And I figured out that a whole section had to be rotated like 45 deg. counter-clockwise. In order to help visualize this RCT 2 "alteration", I had to alter the blueprints. (Forgive my total lack of talent with the cloning tool.)

John. I have taken all of those most recent suggestions of yours and made corrections. I pretty much had to rework the entire track, but I have a feeling I'm still way off the mark. I have to do something with the initial drop. Everyone says it has to be fixed, but nobody wants to offer up suggestions on what to do to actually fix it. Until someone makes a decent suggestion on it, I'll ignore the banter about it.

At any rate, any alteration will probably require rebuilding the entire design again. Like that's nothing new.

So it's either a shallow curve into a steep dive, (which looks totally unrealistic to me. That's like adding shallow straight pieces of track to a crest of a hill. Which makes it look like a barn.) OR in my way, start out with a steep dive, and into a shallow banked curve, then bottom out like real coasters do. Because they go right into a steep dive, then gradually smooth out to horizontal.

There is no other way with the limitations that RCT has. Just accept it people that the drop is going to look F'ked up, because the curved drops in recreations ALWAYS do. Inverted tracks in RCT have always been a pain to work with. It's not like being able to use the sit down track and slap any train you want on it and be praised for being so clever. Inverted track is limited inherently. It's gonna look strange no matter what is done. It'll never look smooth and it'll never look right. There is no alternative like the sit down B&M tracks. Getting over it, moving on.

Anyway, the last element that has to be worked out is the helix. Now that I can see the RCT version of the blueprint, I think a lot has dropped into place. And I think that a lot of others probably see what has to be delt with here. Tonight I'll post images of my latest version.

It turns, gets steep, turns and then smooths out.

I based my first drop on Mirage to be like Montu's

I think that's as realistic and aesthetically pleasing you can get with RCT.

Wolfman, we aren't trying to discourage from completely building this, more like putting it on hold for now. Making recreations is one of the harder aspects of RCT given the game's limitations. I can tell you already see this. However, you should listen to ALL suggestions, try them and if they don't work then go back to the way you like it. If you follow that blueprint, it should turn out better than your previous versions. As for the drop, I would go shallow drop curve, shallow to steep, steep twist, smooth out the bottom. The positive g's (and the lateral g's) at the bottom of your drop look like they would be off the charts (I don't need a novel to tell me that they aren't, just say so). Lastly, the edge of the trench before the corkscrew is a good 25 ft away from the brake run. If it's possible move that section 2-3 tiles to the left.

Wolfman, the drop completes its 180-degree turn more than half way up the first drop. So any turning/curving elements in RCT should come before it makes its descent. Maverick, Lowenaldo and I have shown how this can be achieved so that it looks at least marginally presentable on all four isometric views.

More versions:



After taking this screen I realized the helix under the zero-g roll could be moved closer to the loop, but alas it's another look at the layout. The size of RCT corkscrews makes most B&M recreations unpleasant to work with... Ever since RCT1 I had been hoping for multiple size corkscrews/loops/etc like we have with turns. Anyone up for programming the next game?

John... out of the several examples, I like the drop of your most recent version. At least from that POV. It seems the best to me.

Maverick: As for the helix, I thought I had it nailed since I had to alter the blueprints to fit RCT. Mine's not that far off from your version. I got all day, so I'll probably have a decent representation of V.4 by this evening.

A continuing thanks to everyone who have chipped in and gave their helpful advice on the track. Just a few more alterations and I'm sure that the track will be finished.