Cliffside Canyon

[chill8888]

I wanted to create a park that left plenty of room for above-ground/underground options, so I came up with this. Finally finished it (I think), I keep going back and finding tiny details that I want to change. But I can't think of any more aspects that are bothering me, so now I leave it to you guys! Tell me if I should add/change anything, suggestions, improvements, etc. OH, and I made the scenario in 2 formats, free entry and paid entry. Which version do you think is more suited to the layout/feel of the park? Let me know!

Scenario details:
"You've inherited a plot of land separated by a large canyon carved from a dying river. The previous owner built a wondrous 4-lane coaster before passing. Now you must carry his dream and make this natural spectacle into a monumental theme park!"

Cliffside Canyon (free entry).sc6

Cliffside Canyon (paid entry, plus higher difficulty).sc6

Edited December 14, 2016 by chill8888

[chill8888]

I'm thinking of adding a small "mansion" near the summit of the mountain that the old man (the previous owner) lived in before passing. That would be the house he lived in with his wife who died before him, and he used the rest of his funds to build a park on his land after her passing and before his. Just a bit of backstory, and probably too much to include in the description.

I'm not proficient enough to construct a house out of scenery, so maybe if someone else has an idea for it, they could submit an attempt? I'd love to see others' ideas. Maybe something like @Broxzier's amazing house build.

This scenario is playable in all versions of RCT2, but in order to build anything on the mountain, you probably have to use ORCT because the build height is very high up.

Edited December 14, 2016 by chill8888

[chill8888]

I made my attempt for a mansion, I think it came out rather well actually. Just can't decide which color scheme I like better. Opinions?

 

 

 

Edited December 14, 2016 by chill8888

[Broxzier]

I'd go with the second or third colour scheme. Maybe you can try adding some wooden fences or other structures around the house, to give it a warmer feel.

One little nitpick detail, some of the roof pieces would guide rain into the walls instead of away from it, I'd change those.

[chill8888]

Thanks for the feedback. I was thinking the color scheme might be more slate if it is nearing the summit of a mountain, and less Tuscan colored. And as for the roofing, I assume most houses now have drainage valleys between two gables. Less common in high altitudes however, so I see your point.

[chill8888]

Because you were nitpicking

And now I'm being overly perfectionistic about the front balcony lol. Can't decide which one I like more.

[cascadia]

The mansion should be part of the park. 

[chill8888]

Interesting. What makes you say that? What would be the benefit? I was trying to avoid the possibility of players demolishing or building through it during gameplay, out of respect for the deceased of course

[cascadia]

2 minutes ago, chill8888 said:

Interesting. What makes you say that? What would be the benefit? I was trying to avoid the possibility of players demolishing or building through it during gameplay, out of respect for the deceased of course

I was thinking some players might want to integrate it into the park...

[chill8888]

Then they can build their own damn mansion

[YoloSweggLord]

I like the first one, with the tent roof piece. The other one doesn't really feel like a balcony to me.

[imlegos]

If it's a scenario, why not zone the land around the mansion as purchaseable, and if it's the only purchaseable land, then bump the price to buy up.

 

[chill8888]

16 hours ago, YoloSweggLord said:

I like the first one, with the tent roof piece. The other one doesn't really feel like a balcony to me.

I merged the two concepts, I think it looks like balcony now, without the ugly tent cover.

12 hours ago, imlegos said:

If it's a scenario, why not zone the land around the mansion as purchaseable, and if it's the only purchaseable land, then bump the price to buy up.

 

Good idea. I made the front part of the property purchasable for construction rights, that way they can build over or under it without destroying the existing features.

 

Here's the final version with paid entry. Does anyone think it should be pay-per-ride?

Cliffside Canyon (paid entry)_final.sc6

Edited December 16, 2016 by chill8888

[Wuis]

Wait, what do they have to do if they have a car? They don't have to park way downhill and walk up every time, do they?

Edited December 16, 2016 by Wuis

[chill8888]

We can assume he has a garage one square off the map Thanks for the hyper realism.

[Broxzier]

19 hours ago, imlegos said:

If it's a scenario, why not zone the land around the mansion as purchaseable, and if it's the only purchaseable land, then bump the price to buy up.

I don't see how this would fit the story, the old man already owns the land in the mountain. The only reason for not to have the building being part of the park that I can think of is to prevent the player from destroying it.

[YoloSweggLord]

How about he say that the mansion and the grounds around it are on the national list of historic places and therefore the player doesn't own that land?

[cascadia]

5 hours ago, Broxzier said:

I don't see how this would fit the story, the old man already owns the land in the mountain. The only reason for not to have the building being part of the park that I can think of is to prevent the player from destroying it.

 

3 hours ago, YoloSweggLord said:

How about he say that the mansion and the grounds around it are on the national list of historic places and therefore the player doesn't own that land?

 

Actually, being on the National Register of Historic Places doesn't mean the government owns that property.  The current owner still owns it; it's just that they have to follow certain regulations for land use and building on that property.  A better idea is that his heirs decided to keep the house and sold everything but the house to the current park owner, and put a restrictive covenant on the land to only allow construction rights on it. 

Edited December 16, 2016 by cascadia

[chill8888]

This got way more in depth than I was expecting haha, but very appreciated.

Still on the issue of paid vs. free entry tho. I've never been a huge fan of paid entry play, even tho I do realize that's more realistic. But since I haven't played that style very much, what is a fair expectation of guests within a certain time frame? My map is 125x125 minus about 30 if you don't build over water or on the mountain. Is 4000 guests by year 5 asking too much?

[chill8888]

Ok so I did a playthrough to check that expectation, and from what I can tell, it's a fair number with the "guest generation at higher difficulty" box UNchecked. My first "final" version I posted has that box checked, which proved nearly impossible for me to reach 4000 by year 5.

Here's the real final version

Enjoy.

Cliffside Canyon (paid entry)_final2.sc6

 

One last issue: My mechanic in this scenario, Bob, is a complete moron. I have a set path for him to patrol, but he always ventures wherever the hell he pleases regardless of the 4x4 squares I selected. Is this an AI issue in ORCT? Or is that some RCT issue with custom scenarios retaining staff patrols?

Edited December 22, 2016 by chill8888

[zaxcav]

21 hours ago, chill8888 said:

One last issue: My mechanic in this scenario, Bob, is a complete moron. I have a set path for him to patrol, but he always ventures wherever the hell he pleases regardless of the 4x4 squares I selected. Is this an AI issue in ORCT? Or is that some RCT issue with custom scenarios retaining staff patrols?

There are some known bugs in the pathfinding that are causing these problems with the mechanics.

Fixes have already been submitted and are waiting to be merged.