IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2008-07-21
⏴ go to previous day
00:00:40 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: truebrain * r13769 /branches/noai/src/ai/ai_info.cpp: [NoAI] -Fix: silly me, thinking SQInteger would be an int32 ..
00:03:46 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: truebrain * r13770 /branches/noai/src/ai/ai_info.cpp: [NoAI] -Fix: MSVC is always a pain in my buttttttt
00:04:46 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: truebrain * r13771 /branches/noai/src/ai/ai_info.cpp: [NoAI] -Documentation: add a nice comment why we do something (makes sense, doesn't it?)
00:06:56 <xyz> any NOAI developpers here?
00:34:20 *** Eddi|zuHause2 has joined #openttd
00:47:05 *** Digitalfox_ has joined #openttd
00:48:51 *** mucht_home has joined #openttd
00:50:37 *** sheskar_ has joined #openttd
00:51:05 *** Rubidium_ has joined #openttd
00:51:22 *** Vessajono has joined #openttd
00:51:42 *** Sacro1 is now known as Sacro
01:01:50 *** Born_Acorn has joined #openttd
01:21:13 *** Digitalfox has joined #openttd
01:26:11 *** Tefad_ is now known as Tefad
03:17:10 *** dlunch_ has joined #openttd
05:37:18 *** einKarl has joined #openttd
07:32:24 *** mucht_home is now known as Mucht
07:35:32 *** gregor__ has joined #openttd
07:36:16 *** |Jeroen| has joined #openttd
07:49:08 *** fmauNekAway is now known as fmauNeko
07:53:05 *** GoneWacko has joined #openttd
07:54:24 *** bleepy is now known as Guest558
08:01:14 *** Doorslammer|OTTD has joined #openttd
08:10:36 <Lachie> anyone here proficient at bash scripting?
08:12:12 <Lachie> I'm after a script for Linux that will change the color depth to 16bit, restart x server then run a program. then change dept back to 24 and restart x when it's done
08:12:34 <Lachie> simply two scripts, one that will change it to 16 and restart X, the other changes to 24 and restarts X
08:12:55 * Celestar goes replacing 303 Trains by Maglevs
08:13:09 <blathijs> Lachie: The easy way would be to have two config files that you manually create instead of changing the config file automatically
08:14:17 <Lachie> like an xorg.conf1 and xorg.conf2 and mv them to xorg.conf on demand?
08:15:06 <blathijs> Lachie: You can probably pass -ConfigFile or whatever option to X
08:15:08 <Celestar> can't you switch color depth on-the-fly meanwhile? I know it works with resolution ...
08:15:17 <Celestar> blathijs: that does exist, even for the user
08:15:20 <Lachie> atleast not with my hardware
08:15:24 <blathijs> Yeah, I was just looking at xrandr for that
08:15:32 <blathijs> Lachie: Tried xrandr?
08:16:40 <blathijs> Thoug xrandr doesn't seem to list any options for changing bpp
08:17:20 <blathijs> I see some references to it on google, but that's only error messages from wine that it is not supported
08:19:27 <Celestar> why does auto-copy-order not work from rail to maglev?
08:22:55 <Celestar> I copy a savegame from one box to another, and the total money redouce from 15 billion to 77 million?!
08:24:32 <Celestar> sorry correction: it starts with $0 on the other box
08:24:45 *** Vikthor has joined #openttd
08:34:17 <Gekz_> your game, it ruined your fun
08:34:22 <Gekz_> games arnet meant to ruin fun
08:35:49 <Celestar> do you have anything productive to say? :P
08:47:23 <peter1138> Hmm, 2015... inflation adjusted already?
08:52:08 *** Doorslammer|OTTD has quit IRC
09:11:23 *** planetmaker is now known as pm|away
09:13:26 *** pm|away is now known as planetmaker
09:14:31 *** |Jeroen| has joined #openttd
09:18:02 *** stillunknown has joined #openttd
09:21:39 *** Progman has joined #openttd
09:52:23 <Celestar> peter1138: hm ... I recomiled and it works now O_o
09:58:56 *** Wezz6400 has joined #openttd
10:03:30 *** Wezz6400 has joined #openttd
10:25:04 *** GoneWacko has joined #openttd
10:29:58 <Celestar> the TR09's capacity in DBSetXL is grossly exaggerated
10:40:16 <peter1138> Is that a luxury one?
10:45:24 *** einKarl has joined #openttd
10:51:54 <Celestar> 120 pax per carriage
10:52:08 <Celestar> sounds more like cattle class to me :P
10:54:47 <peter1138> Maybe they're supposed to be very long carriages ;)
11:00:30 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
11:13:38 <planetmaker> he. I mixed up Tardis with Tharsis :P
11:14:27 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai
11:16:03 <Digitalfox> Anything planned for raising the speed limit of road vehicles and ships ( the famous 127KM/h ) in open, so NewGRF can add for example a road vehicle that will reach 200KM/h?
11:17:35 <Celestar> Digitalfox: where do road vehicles go > 127km/h (apart from PVs)
11:20:15 <Digitalfox> Celestar while playing open in 2030.. I expect from 20 years from now, that road vehicles will have a much better AI and you will travel faster and safer ( that means you won't touch the drive wheel, the computer does everything ;) )
11:20:46 <ln> Digitalfox: it's more likely that in 20 years the speed limits are lower than now.
11:20:47 <Celestar> Digitalfox: I hope so, but I don'T see that (yet) happening (=
11:21:08 <Digitalfox> So >127KM/h seems slow :(
11:21:09 <Celestar> ln: I fear that you're right
11:21:57 <Eddi|zuHause2> even if technically possible, there are still laws against trucks going >80km/h
11:22:08 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: that's germany.
11:22:14 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: they go faster in other countries
11:22:28 <Eddi|zuHause2> yes, but not unlimited ;)
11:23:14 <Celestar> oh damn people, use planes :P
11:23:16 <Eddi|zuHause2> i know no other countries where cars are allowed to go >130km/h at all
11:23:32 <Digitalfox> This of topic, but one of things I hate more on speed lower defenders is that they think all cars are equal.. When I drive my Renault R5 120 KM/h seems too much fast for that car.. But when I driver my Audi A3 140 KM/h seems a nice speed for driving in Autoway
11:23:52 <Noldo> I thing 120km/h is the highest speed limit here
11:24:01 <Celestar> When I driver our 530d at 140km/h, it feels like sleeping
11:24:07 <Celestar> revs at around 1900 :P
11:24:33 *** Frostregen has joined #openttd
11:25:05 <ln> Digitalfox: Still, when you hit an object with your Audi A3, your body has the same limit of deceleration it can tolerate without fatal damage to internal organs.
11:25:31 <Celestar> ln: well, you're more likely to survive a crash in an A3 at N km/h than in a R5 and N/2 km/h
11:25:39 <Digitalfox> Celestar that's what i felt and feel every time I drive on autoway, but it's the law :(
11:26:50 <Celestar> there must be a reason why the number of casualties p.a. on German roads is constantly decreasing
11:27:00 <Celestar> and it's neither better drivers nor less accidents
11:27:11 <Celestar> nor is it better roads
11:27:31 <Celestar> this day and age, you can often walk away from an 70km/h head-on crash
11:27:32 <Noldo> bad luck for the insurance companies
11:27:40 <Digitalfox> I also think the same :)
11:27:48 <Celestar> Noldo: not really, the number of accidents is constantly increasing
11:28:13 <Noldo> injured people cost more that dead ones
11:28:24 <Celestar> Noldo: depends on the injury P
11:28:45 <Noldo> also the cars are more expensive and more often not repairable
11:29:04 <Celestar> Frostregen: plus consider the traffic density of 1970 with that of 2007...
11:29:16 <ln> max(Sweden) = 110, max(Bjarniland) = 130, max(Finland) = 120
11:30:05 <Celestar> max(Celestarland) = c
11:30:23 <Eddi|zuHause2> what max speed does a Regio Citadis have?
11:30:44 <Noldo> it was bit odd to drive in sweden because the limits are 110,90,70 etc. while 120,100,80 here
11:30:44 <Eddi|zuHause2> (Tram/Railway hybrid)
11:31:10 <Frostregen> @Celestar: Maybe this is a proove for the contrary. Look at the average speed on your way back home through rush-hour traffic ;)
11:31:28 <Frostregen> today you cannot even reach deadly speeds ;)
11:31:30 <ln> Noldo: and a 110 in sweden can be either a motorway or a narrow road.
11:31:36 <Digitalfox> If you drive a good car that has nice crash resistance and technology ( yes not everybody can buy one, it's the world we have ;) ) you have a greater % of survival in car crash even if at 200KM/h..
11:32:11 <Celestar> Frostregen: well, I'm trying to drive ahead of the rush-hour, but ok. I'm usually not exceeding 110km/h on the highways during my daily commute
11:32:15 <Noldo> and that is the most excelent reason to go the same % faster
11:32:45 <Celestar> on long range trips .. that's different
11:32:53 <Celestar> 150-160km/h cruise speed
11:33:06 <ln> The problem is that as the safety of cars gets better, people also drive more unsafely because they have the feeling they are on a safe vehicle.
11:33:42 <Digitalfox> I have seen a A3 from a friend ( before buying mine I was thinking on buying his ) cut in half by a tree at 190KM/s and guess what he survived with scratches =0 Sure yhe car had no fixing possible, and he was alone in the car, but he survived at 190KM/s
11:33:46 <Eddi|zuHause2> Frostregen: i have a question about this statistics... how did they handle the "significant increase of area" around 1990?
11:34:06 <Eddi|zuHause2> (assuming this is based on germany)
11:34:46 <Frostregen> no further comment on their site
11:34:51 <Frostregen> (statistisches bundesamt)
11:34:54 <Eddi|zuHause2> (and that before 1990 they mean west germany)
11:35:23 <Frostregen> maybe this explains the small hill around 1990
11:35:24 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: you can see a slight increase of casulaties in 1990
11:35:33 <Celestar> because of the noticable increase in population
11:35:34 <Eddi|zuHause2> i noticed that...
11:35:55 <Eddi|zuHause2> but i kinda thought the increase should be more significant
11:35:58 <Celestar> still 13.6 bodies per day :(
11:36:06 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: most people didn't have a car there.
11:36:25 <Eddi|zuHause2> but the number of cars increased significantly over the next few years
11:36:59 <Celestar> in 2004, they had 43000 fatalities in the USA
11:37:31 <Eddi|zuHause2> that's almost 10 times the fatalities compared to 5 times of the population
11:37:47 <Celestar> and a very very low speed limit
11:38:04 <Celestar> btw: only 5% of the fatalities in germany invovle speeds > 120km/h
11:38:10 <Eddi|zuHause2> well... seatbelts
11:39:26 <Celestar> and sorry to say that: piss poor driving skills
11:39:50 <Eddi|zuHause2> well, they don't pay 2000€ for a drivers license
11:40:23 <Eddi|zuHause2> well, 2000€ is probably exaggerated
11:40:36 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: these days? 2000 EUR is cheap
11:40:58 <Eddi|zuHause2> i think i payed something around 1500 DM back in 2000
11:41:07 *** Wezz6400_ has joined #openttd
11:41:16 <Eddi|zuHause2> Celestar: it depends heavily on the city you are in ;)
11:41:25 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: I'm in expensive-city
11:42:32 <Eddi|zuHause2> Frostregen: not much snow in the last year, it appears :p
11:42:57 <Frostregen> people just don't know how to handle their cars
11:43:49 <Celestar> too many fair-weather-drivers
11:43:51 <Eddi|zuHause2> well, the effect of rain on the braking distance is easily misjudged
11:44:16 <Frostregen> because they never tested it
11:44:33 <Celestar> it depends highly on the intensity, the tyres, and the road itself
11:44:35 <Eddi|zuHause2> because that is not part of the driving school
11:44:46 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: which is a bad thing imho
11:45:14 <Frostregen> i think this is not possible in driving school
11:45:30 <Frostregen> you learn how to handle a car after the driving school
11:45:46 <Frostregen> would take way to much time
11:46:39 <Eddi|zuHause2> my driving school offered a free coupon for a driving security lesson after finishing
11:47:34 <Celestar> Frostregen: imagine pilots would operate like that ..
11:48:00 <Frostregen> there are simulators :)
11:48:08 <Celestar> there are car simulators as well
11:48:31 <Frostregen> i have never seen any good
11:48:36 <ln> 14:33 < Digitalfox> I have seen a A3 from a friend [...] Sure yhe car had no fixing possible, and he was alone in the car, but he survived at 190KM/s <--- that's fast
11:49:45 <ln> the friction by the atmosphere must be significant
11:49:57 <Frostregen> compare with racing simulations... without the feel for acceleration/weight distribution, i just can't drive
11:50:13 <Eddi|zuHause2> an aquaintance of mine almost died in his van (~100km/h) when he hit a lorry (~30km/h) going uphill
11:50:25 <Eddi|zuHause2> Frostregen: i agree
11:59:12 * Celestar resumes replacing 320 trains with maglevs
11:59:28 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: truebrain * r13772 /branches/noai/src/ (ai/ai.cpp ai/ai_info.cpp settings.cpp): [NoAI] -Fix: make the AIPlayer settings _newgame aware
11:59:49 <Eddi|zuHause2> i haven't done this maglev replacing in years
12:00:15 <Eddi|zuHause2> not since i found the dbset ;)
12:00:28 <Celestar> but that has the TR09
12:00:39 <Celestar> and the ICE3 sucks for my network
12:01:11 <Eddi|zuHause2> you mentioned ;)
12:01:36 <Celestar> I can also reduce the number of trains
12:01:41 <Celestar> which really really really helps
12:02:07 <Eddi|zuHause2> as long as you do not have any cargo trains ;)
12:02:27 <Celestar> this is a pax only game
12:02:48 <Eddi|zuHause2> yes, i figured ;)
12:05:54 <Celestar> I'd rather restart the network with much fewer trains now and then slowly upgauge it again
12:24:10 <Ammler> "Flyspray was unable to connect to the database. Check your settings in flyspray.conf.php"
12:30:04 <Eddi|zuHause2> post a bug report at flyspray :p
12:31:29 <Ammler> Eddi|zuHause2: btw, GRF gui has now support for ECS.
12:32:24 <blathijs> Ammler: I asked truebrain to fix it, it's working again now
12:44:05 *** Rubidium_ is now known as Rubidium
13:00:48 *** stillunknown has joined #openttd
13:10:43 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: rubidium * r13773 /trunk/src/ (network/network_server.cpp settings.cpp): -Codechange: disable autoclean for protected/unprotected companies when the timeout is set to 0. Based on an idea by Thomas.
13:20:46 *** grumbel has joined #openttd
13:27:08 <Celestar> I've just spent $18e9 on the maglev replacing process
13:28:20 <Celestar> 19 left to replace, 7 to discard
13:28:52 <Celestar> the main question is: I have then 220 maglevs in the depots: Should I jumpstart them or launch them in some kind of organized manner?
13:29:46 <Eddi|zuHause2> hm... i never have a use for the ET-11
13:31:59 <Eddi|zuHause2> the game probably needs to start earlier, so you can have a big network by the time these express trains come out
13:33:28 <Eddi|zuHause2> 1922 or so... with daylength x4
13:33:57 <Celestar> started in 1920 here (no daylength, no build on pause)
13:34:36 <Ammler> Eddi|zuHause2: doesn't your towns grow too fast?
13:34:49 * Celestar wonders whether the game will crash when he tries to update the whole rail network to maglev at once
13:35:12 <Eddi|zuHause2> Ammler: the cities grow quite fast, but the villages don't
13:35:42 <Eddi|zuHause2> Ammler: i've tweaked a few values in the daylength patch, though
13:36:05 <Ammler> did you play with eGRVTS already?
13:36:06 <Eddi|zuHause2> like, the 256 tick industry callback is only called every daylength*256ticks
13:36:23 <Eddi|zuHause2> i didn't even play with normal GRVTS
13:36:28 <Celestar> 1 to discard, 10 to replace
13:36:46 <Ammler> you need quite small cities for those horse waggons
13:38:26 <Eddi|zuHause2> Ammler: my central city is now ~30k while the villages around it hardly grew at all
13:40:31 * peter1138 continues with his game.
13:43:38 <Eddi|zuHause2> fjb: but that does not help me setting up a full mainline network by 1900
13:44:13 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: we should ask MB to make trains for the DBSetXL prior to 1920 imho
13:44:25 <fjb> Eddi|zuHause2: Bug MB to implement earlier trains...
13:44:54 <Eddi|zuHause2> Celestar: i think he already has, but he is still in the process to get it release ready
13:45:00 <peter1138> MB won't do it without TTDPatch support.
13:45:57 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: maybe we should do it (=
13:46:05 <fjb> That is the problem with MB. But the DBset is still the favorite set of most german players.
13:46:28 <Eddi|zuHause2> >>i was wondering if you're going to implement pre-1920 material in the upcoming 0.9 release?
13:46:28 <Eddi|zuHause2> >Yes, at least to some degree and that early date showing up only in OTTD, see list below.
13:46:33 <peter1138> Yeah, and all us UK players only play UKRS too :D
13:46:45 <Celestar> the British trains suck :P
13:46:47 <fjb> Or we create our own german train set. Starting at the Länderbahn age.
13:46:59 <Celestar> at the K. Bay. St. B.
13:47:30 <fjb> Starting 1844 with K. Bay. St. B.
13:47:47 <Eddi|zuHause2> 1835 was the first line i thought
13:48:10 <fjb> 1835 was the Ludwigsbahn, not the K. Bay. St. B.
13:48:16 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause2: yes. 7th of December if I'm not mistaken. Nue-Fuerth
13:48:30 <Eddi|zuHause2> first a tiny route from nürnberg to fürth, and then the mainline from leipzig to dresden
13:48:42 <Eddi|zuHause2> Gekz: why would you do that?
13:48:47 * Celestar tries replacing a 1kx1k map :D
13:49:21 <Celestar> completed :D cost about $2 billion
13:49:28 <Eddi|zuHause2> Gekz: what do you think does the engine pool do?
13:49:35 <Celestar> :/ do we have any pretty maglev newgrfs?
13:50:12 <Eddi|zuHause2> Celestar: there was a "transrapid track" grf, but with the simulated raised tracks it was far from "pretty"
13:50:12 <Ammler> and dbset with transrapid
13:51:06 <Gekz> Eddi|zuHause2: ... what?
13:51:33 <Ammler> Eddi|zuHause2: it is not that bad with the bridge
13:52:00 <Ammler> signals are a little bit problematic
13:52:05 <Eddi|zuHause2> Ammler: i don't know... i have just seen some screenshots
13:53:39 * Celestar jumpstarts 228 Transrapids and sees what YAPP can do :P
13:54:03 <Eddi|zuHause2> it shouldn't have that much trouble...
13:54:14 <Eddi|zuHause2> if you said 2000 transrapids... :p
13:55:43 <Celestar> would you really want to replace those manually?
13:56:57 <Eddi|zuHause2> you could try to play a NoAI game and have these tasks scripted ;)
13:57:00 <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause2: In theory I can make a railtype that is actually raise, but you'd get problems with bridges and tunnels.
13:57:42 <glx> Eddi|zuHause2: it's not possible to have AI and player in the same company
13:58:13 <peter1138> I built an extensive extension but ran out of money, so there's no train to run on it.
13:59:00 <fjb> peter1138: That is really a bad thing.
13:59:03 <Mchl> we expect explaining explanation
13:59:05 <Eddi|zuHause2> the max loan should be based on the amount of company assets
14:01:01 <peter1138> Or lease vehicles. Doesn't cost anything to get them, only a greatly increased running cost.
14:02:41 <Eddi|zuHause2> there should be a simulation of a second market for vehicles
14:02:53 <Eddi|zuHause2> where you can get cheap used vehicles
14:04:23 <Eddi|zuHause2> hm... i don't know where to put my station next to this town...
14:04:53 <Eddi|zuHause2> there's a steep valley and the town is in the valley, and the rail comes from the hills
14:05:10 <Eddi|zuHause2> i don't want to put the station in the valley, but on the hill there is a factory in the way
14:05:36 <hylje> peter1138: vehicle leasing could be good really, but might be enabled only later on?
14:06:14 <fjb> Eddi|zuHause2: Other side of he valley?
14:06:38 <Eddi|zuHause2> too far away from the city
14:08:11 <hylje> approach the city from the valley
14:08:23 <Eddi|zuHause2> sure, but tram rather ;)
14:08:49 <Eddi|zuHause2> fjb: this is not 1880 ;)
14:09:26 <fjb> But tourists would like a horse tram. Trust me.
14:09:34 <peter1138> hylje, I don't really know the history of it all.
14:10:15 <Eddi|zuHause2> i need an "8" button for the station sizes!
14:10:24 <Eddi|zuHause2> 7 is a weird number...
14:10:56 <hylje> what about drag&drop stations?
14:11:04 <peter1138> I will get stuck later as I'm building 4 tile platforms at the moment.
14:12:14 <fjb> You can enhance them later.
14:12:38 <peter1138> Some can be lengthened.
14:13:01 <hylje> speaking of stations, where are my sloped and curvy stations?
14:13:13 <hylje> or rolling load/unload?
14:14:08 <peter1138> Hmm, seems like the AI can't make money with UKRS :o
14:14:28 <peter1138> Although supporting the callbacks might help;
14:14:32 <fjb> Curvy stationa would be great, or at least diagonal ones. But that will need new sprites.
14:14:51 <fjb> UKRS has very high running costs.
14:29:00 <Eddi|zuHause2> www.informatik.uni-halle.de/~krause/Klein%20Elsmuenster%20Transport,%2026.%20Okt%201935.png <- i think that solution is ok
14:29:34 *** Klanticus has joined #openttd
14:30:27 <Eddi|zuHause2> to place the station near the city, without blocking an exit by an industry and without going into the valley
14:30:52 <fjb> The station building is still missing.
14:31:19 <Eddi|zuHause2> fjb: there are no proper big station buildings...
14:31:35 <fjb> Better a small one than none...
14:31:36 <Eddi|zuHause2> i mean something like 2x2 or 2x3
14:32:16 <Eddi|zuHause2> now... 3 tram lines waiting for vehicles
14:33:08 <fjb> I started on some buildings some time ago, but my drawing skills suck.
14:33:11 <peter1138> Bah, I really really want passenger destinations.
14:34:13 <fjb> I guess Belugas had an idea about cargo destinations just before he went on vacation.
14:34:52 <Gekz> 3D render some real buildings
14:34:56 <fjb> But I don't know if it was just some kind of idea or something more.
14:35:46 <peter1138> Shouldn't be too hard to pick a route based on orders, right?
14:36:00 <fjb> Take a model railway catalog, cut out the station pictures and glue them to the screen. :-)
14:36:40 <fjb> peter1138: Right. But how about the non nonstop orders, where a vehicle stops at every station...
14:37:36 <fjb> The last passenger destination patch looked at the orders.
14:37:39 <peter1138> I'm happy to ignore those for destination routing.
14:38:16 <Eddi|zuHause2> peter1138: the current patch can determine these non-nonstop orders already
14:38:28 <Eddi|zuHause2> maybe that part can be salvaged somehow
14:39:00 <fjb> Will that patch survive or does it have to be done in a completely new way to fix the desyncs?
14:42:04 <Celestar> Rubidium: I'm closing in: 2.4 million units of cargo per year
14:42:35 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: peter1138 * r13774 /trunk/src/newgrf.cpp: -Codechange: Add support for changing vehicle purchase list position for all vehicle types.
14:42:40 <Yexo> Celestar: what map size / settings?
14:43:01 <Celestar> Yexo: 1024x1024. pax only
14:43:25 <Celestar> I have about 50% connected up to now
14:58:16 *** mikegrb has joined #openttd
15:12:20 * peter1138 ponders working on destinations
15:13:13 * Yexo hopes peter1138 will code it :)
15:13:29 * Yorick hopes Yexo's wish will come true
15:17:24 * hylje hopes it will never make it to the destination just to spite Yorick
15:20:33 <planetmaker> [16:10] <Eddi|zuHause2> i need an "8" button for the station sizes! <-- I rather wished there was a <- 7 -> changable number for station size :)
15:20:50 <hylje> default station size 7*7
15:21:39 <Eddi|zuHause2> planetmaker: no, i often switch between values like 1x1 (for individual station parts) and 8x6 (for whole initial station size)
15:21:51 <Eddi|zuHause2> it should be random access
15:22:51 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause2: both. keeping the numbers as is, an addition # button and place a <- # -> slider next to it, setting the # for the custom size
15:23:48 <planetmaker> or maybe station size pre-sets :)
15:29:04 *** Vikthor has joined #openttd
15:32:33 * peter1138 mumbles about MB's station's buffers being 1x1 only...
15:40:54 <zooks> can anyone maybe help me with buildOttd?
15:41:03 *** tom0004 has joined #openttd
15:41:35 <Ammler> I know, you do not like comparing with patch, but isn't the "+7" a good idea?
15:42:51 *** tom0004 has joined #openttd
15:43:52 <Progman> zooks: at least the author can ;)
15:44:37 <peter1138> TTDPatch's way of allowing larger stations.
15:45:07 <Ammler> if active, it adds +7 to the length you choosed.
15:45:20 <DaleStan> It's TTDPatch's old way of allowing larger stations, and I agree that there are better solutions.
15:45:57 <Ammler> old way, is there a newer?
15:49:29 <DaleStan> Sort of. Combine irregularstations and largestations, and you can tack on whatever tiles or platforms you want/need.
15:51:03 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: glx * r13775 /trunk/src/network/network_server.cpp: -Codechange: enforce the validity of a NetworkAction (chat packet) issued by a client
15:51:03 <DaleStan> That's my usual way; if you know when you're building the station that it needs to be bigger than 7x7, you're either seriously over-engineering, or replacing a station. (I basically don't do the latter.)
15:52:44 <Ammler> well, 8 is quite common, DBSet ICE has that length fixed (4-8-12-16)
15:53:37 <peter1138> Some limits should never've been broken :p
15:53:39 <joachim> for the mainline goods trains
15:54:18 <Ammler> does the train needs to wait for loading?
15:54:24 <Brianetta> 8 platforms is great for having two termini facing different directions.
15:54:41 <Ammler> else it would be better, if you have more smaller trains. (for raiting)
15:55:04 <joachim> of course, there has to be huge amounts of goods available
15:56:12 <Brianetta> Very long coal trains look pretty good if you use a combination of Blunck's null station tiles and the industrial coal loader. Put the coal loader in the middle of the station, and have the train protrude significantly from each end on the invisible parts.
15:56:50 <Brianetta> If you have several platforms, you can mix up the lengths of the invisible protrusions
15:56:54 <Brianetta> It looks quite real at a glance
15:59:01 <Ammler> they should be transparent...
15:59:29 <Ammler> wasn't that possible in early times?
15:59:32 <Brianetta> They look like regular track
16:00:08 <Brianetta> So it looks (at first glance) like all the loading trains are at various stages of loading, real-life stylee
16:00:21 <Brianetta> where they shunt the train through, a wagon at a time
16:00:40 <Ammler> they are called *void" afaik
16:00:43 <Brianetta> If only there was a way to decouple the mainline loco and use it for something else in the meantime...
16:01:02 <Brianetta> I'm at work, though, and can't check
16:02:23 <Ammler> you are sure, you do not need :P
16:02:54 <peter1138> Someone should implement that properly.
16:03:53 <Ammler> you could "refit" it to transparent
16:07:56 <Ammler> train goes to depot -> autoreplace with transparent engine -> loading -> depot autoreplace to heavy engine -->
16:09:02 <peter1138> Well I meant the rolling loading actually.
16:09:14 <peter1138> Also there was the word 'properly' ;p
16:11:01 <Ammler> something in combination with eddis middle stop
16:12:30 <Ammler> and only loading where the train has plattform, instead of slow down.
16:13:26 * peter1138 ponders also resurrecting the 'bendy' stations patch.
16:13:35 <peter1138> Although I have no idea how to integrate that with NewGRF stations.
16:22:59 <Brianetta> peter1138: How does a bendy station work?
16:23:11 <Brianetta> All you'd need, surely, is one grf for the bendy ones
16:23:27 <Yorick> is 0.6.2-RC2 going to be released any time soon?
16:23:36 <Brianetta> People can continue to use current grfs regular orthogonal stations.
16:24:08 <peter1138> Well corner pieces...
16:24:11 <blathijs> Yorick: Is RC1 broken?
16:24:28 <Yorick> but quite a few bugs got backported
16:25:15 <Yexo> bugs got backported <- I hope this isn't true :p
16:26:22 * peter1138 attempts to read this paxdest patch.
16:27:26 * Rubidium calls peter1138's shrink to prepare for a visit
16:27:49 <peter1138> Sheesh this is bad!
16:29:02 <peter1138> CARGO_DESTINATION_SLOT_LEHGTH
16:29:58 <Brianetta> peter1138: That alone should be enough to discard it.
16:30:57 * peter1138 wonders if the concept of returning passengers is really necessary.
16:40:32 <Celestar> peter1138: which one peter1138 ?
16:42:18 <Celestar> peter1138: the one on the dev forum?
16:46:06 <Celestar> why are my ratings stuck at 83?
16:46:40 <Brianetta> Some passengers at the destination will randomly want to take the same journey in reverse. They'll do.
16:47:18 <Rubidium> except tourists, they want to take another route to another tourist attraction ;)
16:49:28 <fjb> Poor tourists want to go back home. All expenses tourists don't have any destination and are carried anywhere like it is now without the patch. ;-)
16:52:04 <fjb> Doen't look that unusual.
16:52:27 <Celestar> yeah but I prefer less cramped stations
16:53:49 <fjb> I once had a mainline crossing a town on bridges.
16:54:55 <fjb> Peter's small things under briddges patch would have been helpfull then.
16:55:19 <Celestar> "small things" being?
16:55:45 <Ammler> hmm "X" doesn't work on screenshots :-P
16:55:49 <fjb> Low station parts, bus stops, small houses.
16:56:08 <Celestar> bus stops: ok. stations: ok. houses: ?
16:56:18 <Celestar> neither does RMB+drag
16:56:19 <fjb> Dragging with the left mouse button also doesn't work.
16:56:37 *** Osai is now known as Osai^Kendo
16:57:09 <fjb> Celestar: There are small houses and tall houses. The game should know the bounding box of a house.
16:57:37 *** thingwath has joined #openttd
16:59:58 <Celestar> fjb: normally, bridges are not built OVER houses, are they?
17:00:09 <joachim> with the town growth patch it seems obstacles (like tracks) stops towns from expanding in all directions, does anyone else have or know about that?
17:00:54 <joachim> not sure it the behaviour is different without that patch
17:01:02 <fjb> Celestar: Peter has a secret patch in his cellar.
17:08:43 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
17:21:29 *** Prof_Frink has joined #openttd
17:22:42 <Celestar> andromeda:/home 8.9T 8.5T 398G 96% /nfs/home
17:29:52 <peter1138> The problem is, maglev is ugly.
17:30:48 <peter1138> I have no idea what half this patch is supposed to be doing :o
17:31:25 <Celestar> peter1138: the paxdest?
17:33:17 <Celestar> peter1138: I know what it does. It runs a for-loop over all cargopackets every single day :o
17:33:58 <Celestar> suggestion solution by author: do this on a second core (or something along those lines)
17:35:16 <Celestar> peter1138: are we going to pursue the paxdest thing at some point or not? I've had quite some ideas about it which might actually work :P
17:39:26 <peter1138> I'd like to, not necessarily this way, though.
17:39:43 <peter1138> My theory is destinations only need to be updated if orders are changed.
17:40:11 <peter1138> But I don't know quite what that for-loop does.
17:41:07 <peter1138> I don't know what the statistics are used for.
17:45:18 <glx> <Celestar> suggestion solution by author: do this on a second core (or something along those lines) <-- as it already fail to work in multiplayer that won't matter ;)
17:47:02 <peter1138> I'd also like to see destinations for all cargo types.
17:47:12 <peter1138> All optional, of course.
17:47:26 <Celestar> peter1138: your theory is congruent with my theory
17:47:34 <Celestar> peter1138: and it does work.
17:47:35 <peter1138> Different methods of selecting destination depending on the cargo's behaviour (TE_ enum)
17:47:54 <Celestar> peter1138: I've got to go, can we resume this tomorrow? :D
17:48:09 <planetmaker> [19:47] <peter1138> All optional, of course. <--- please! Or it would be worse than with stockpiling and rough economy and ECS :)
17:48:44 <peter1138> I'm fully aware that not everyone sees the benefits ;)
17:49:17 <planetmaker> peter1138: it's not that I don't see the benefit. But I know that I _also_ enjoy the traditional game with huge piles at one station :)
17:51:45 <planetmaker> I just don't come around often to testing non MP patches :)
17:51:47 <peter1138> God damn, I'm in love with michi_cc!
17:51:55 <planetmaker> though I did with this...
17:52:35 <SmatZ> no need to exaplain further :)
17:52:38 <Yorick> commit it to show your love
17:52:49 <planetmaker> hehe :) intended mis-understanding ;)
17:52:56 <peter1138> I'll wait for Brianetta's wave of testing to fix all the bugs ;)
17:54:02 <peter1138> The AI has built a rail bridge all the way through a town over a road.
17:54:19 <peter1138> Quite a nice solution, actually.
17:54:37 <fjb> Never thought the ai would be smart enough.
17:54:47 <peter1138> Well, it's shame about the weird loops either side of it...
17:55:45 <fjb> It would be great to have bus stops at the road under the bridge. *hint*
17:56:47 <planetmaker> (I meant the solution of the AI)
17:56:50 <glx> fjb: that would allow all stations under bridge
17:57:11 <Yorick> heh, 0.6.2-RC1 is actually network-compatible with 0.6.1
17:57:28 <fjb> Runway under a bridge... why not? :-)
17:57:54 <planetmaker> hm.... I've seen the reverse: runway as a bridge... :)
17:58:11 <fjb> That is really not that unusual.
17:58:55 <peter1138> glx: All? My existing patch already allows different types and heights...
17:59:58 <Yorick> I think some kind of newgrf parameter
18:04:43 <blathijs> Yorick: Is it really compatible? Or does it just not desync within the first few seconds? :-_
18:05:00 <Yorick> blathijs: I've been on a server for over an hour
18:05:06 <Yorick> so it is quite compatible
18:05:36 <blathijs> With a hacked client that changes the version number?
18:06:12 <Yorick> with the -n argument ;)
18:06:46 <Yorick> it is only disabled gui-wise
18:06:51 <blathijs> hmm, somehow I think that's a flaw in our code :-p
18:07:09 <Yorick> it doesn't even know the servers revision
18:07:27 <Yorick> and you cannot get tge revision with tcp
18:07:36 <blathijs> Then that's another flaw :-p
18:07:52 <Rubidium> Yorick: how extensively have you tested it?
18:07:59 <glx> Yorick: savegames are stable in any branch
18:08:01 <Rubidium> I reckon I can cause a desync pretty quickly
18:08:04 <Yorick> Rubidium: just joined a server...
18:08:19 <Yorick> I do not care about your abilities
18:08:25 <Yorick> it works under normal conditions
18:08:25 <glx> so the client can load it, but commands may do different things
18:08:52 <Yorick> I've had 0 desyncs so far
18:09:46 <Rubidium> Yorick: now let an RV run to a non-drive through road stop and when it enters send it to the depot
18:10:39 <Rubidium> and there's some signal state updates that can cause desyncs, also easily causing a desync
18:14:16 <blathijs> Yorick: Hmm, from looking at the changelog, it seems that they should indeed be pretty compatible, as long as you don't trigger any of the bugs fixed in 0.6.2
18:16:49 <peter1138> glx: No, a new GRF property.
18:17:08 <peter1138> Which defaults to not allowing a bridge.
18:21:34 <fjb> I need a one way sign for rail roads.
18:22:50 <Yorick> blathijs: I would love it if you fixed the implementation (revision in tcp packet, clientid in command-packet)
18:22:52 <fjb> A place where the one way sign is nedded is not always a safe waiting point.
18:23:29 <peter1138> Ah, for YAPP. Yes, I've needed that before.
18:24:47 <blathijs> Yorick: Actually, it seems the code is already there, just disabled by default :-)
18:25:50 <Rubidium> why clientid in the command packet?
18:26:03 <joachim> i thought a one-way yapp signal wasn't a safe waiting point for opposing trains
18:26:28 <Rubidium> cause it's pointless to add it?
18:26:38 <blathijs> The socket determines which client sent the packet, right?
18:26:50 <Yorick> you can't know it client-side
18:26:52 <blathijs> Ie, you can't send packets for more than 1 client over a single socket?
18:27:07 <Rubidium> it is as blathijs says
18:27:16 <blathijs> Do you need to know the client id clientside then?
18:28:11 <peter1138> joachim, yes but we'd like one that isn't a safe point for any direction.
18:29:19 <joachim> that would be nice for single tracks :)
18:29:41 <Yorick> for administrating purposes
18:30:30 <joachim> depends on the implementation
18:30:32 <Yorick> I think it's a serious defacement for a logger if it doesnt know what client it came from
18:30:45 <Ammler> peter1138: isn't that the same as no signal?
18:31:28 <joachim> it should disallow one direction, Ammler
18:31:44 <Ammler> but not allow stopping
18:32:16 <Yorick> blathijs: where is that functionality with revisions?
18:32:26 <blathijs> Yorick: look for WITH_REV
18:33:14 <Yorick> blathijs: yeah, but that's server-side
18:33:39 <Rubidium> what's the point with it being server side?
18:33:43 <blathijs> Yorick: So the clients sends its revision, and the server denies everyone with a different rev
18:33:44 <Yorick> I would like to know the server-revision clientside
18:34:00 <blathijs> Yorick: Ah, then you should use an UDP query :-p
18:34:03 <Yorick> blathijs: I could still just adapt my revision to the server revision using that udp packet
18:34:17 <blathijs> Yorick: Yeah, it is, by definition, not fool proof
18:34:47 <blathijs> Yorick: But it's mainly to prevent people from making mistakes, not anything else
18:34:59 <ln> joachim: not right there. if you have a map nearby, that picture is from somewhere between Seinäjoki and Vaasa, which doesn't have elrails.
18:35:22 <Yorick> blathijs: it's clear that I do not make a mistake if I use that -n command
18:36:52 <joachim> ln: ok. and what am i looking at?
18:37:18 <fjb> peter1138: Could a kind of programmable sign get implemented, not only as an one way sign but also to add penalty to the pathfinder depending on the lenght and load of the train?
18:37:37 <ln> joachim: just those two towns, dunno
18:38:31 <Yorick> blathijs: I find it a bit stupid to set up an UDP connection just to get the revision
18:40:33 <Yorick> ln: shush...you'll ruin my theories
18:41:51 <ln> Yorick: UDP is connectionless.
18:42:48 <Yorick> "I find it a bit stupid to listen for udp just to get the revision"
18:44:16 <blathijs> Yorick: I agree that it wouldn't be weird to let the server send its revision
18:44:40 <blathijs> otoh, if we just enable the WITH_REV check again, you can be sure that the server's revision is the same as yours, and the problem is solved :-)
18:44:58 <blathijs> Yorick: Can you give an example of those administration purpose for the client id, btw?
18:45:13 <Eddi|zuHause2> fjb: imho that kind of functionality should be put into waypoints
18:45:47 <Yorick> "company 4 built a new industry at tile 12581" <-- that's a log entry
18:45:59 <fjb> Eddi|zuHause2: We need diagonal waypoints then.
18:46:18 <Eddi|zuHause2> fjb: different issue ;)
18:46:49 <Eddi|zuHause2> signals are already way too overloaded with functionality
18:46:51 <fjb> And waypoints that are smaller.
18:47:14 <fjb> Proggrammable signals are a bad choice with yapp.
18:48:13 <Yorick> blathijs: coop games without a password
18:48:59 <blathijs> Yorick: And then you need it why?
18:49:20 <Yorick> to figure out what client is blocking stuff/selling trains
18:49:58 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: rubidium * r13776 /trunk/src/network/network_server.cpp: -Fix: some revision checking code was unintentionally disabled.
18:50:07 <blathijs> Ah, when you have multiple clients per company?
18:51:08 <blathijs> Ah, then it makes a bit more sense to send a client id in addition to a player id :-)
18:51:31 <Rubidium> but... why would a client need to do the logging?
18:51:48 <blathijs> Or there should be an extra abstraction, company id
18:51:53 <Yorick> because a server needs to be patched
18:52:11 <Rubidium> I reckon that a server has more chance of actually staying in game when bad things happen than any client
18:52:12 <blathijs> ie, client id <1-to-1> player id <many to one> company id
18:52:42 <Rubidium> playerid == companyid
18:52:42 <blathijs> anyhow, /me is off to cleaning
18:52:54 <SmatZ> why do you need that? for malicious user, changing client_id is matter of one second
18:53:05 <Yorick> are you really doing everything in your path to stop me from doing nice things?
18:53:11 <SmatZ> or you can even put client_id = Random() on game start
18:53:28 <Yorick> SmatZ: if you are the server...
18:53:43 <blathijs> Rubidium: Currently yes, but a many-to-one between client and player is weird. Multiple players have one company, not multiple clients controlling one player (IMO, but this is mostly conceptual)
18:53:43 <Yorick> you can't change the client_id on the server
18:54:04 <Rubidium> blathijs: the problem is that "player" is wrongly named
18:54:20 <SmatZ> well, I think it wouldn't hurt to send client number instead of my_cmd ...
18:54:23 <Rubidium> a "player" in OpenTTD's sense is a "company"
18:54:34 <blathijs> Rubidium: Yeah, that's actually even better. Ie, rename player to company and client to player :-)
18:55:09 <blathijs> And leave out client (which corresponds to having a 1-to-1 relation, which is usually pointless anyway)
18:55:49 <SmatZ> hehe changing naming scheme will cause even more mess
18:55:50 <Yorick> Rubidium: are you doing everything in your path to stop me from doing some nice things?
18:55:59 <SmatZ> so you have to say "player in the new meaning of that word"
18:56:17 <blathijs> SmatZ: That's only temporary :-)
18:56:45 <blathijs> Yorick: Nobody is really stopping you from doing anything
18:56:56 <blathijs> Yorick: We're just trying understand what you want to do and why
18:57:06 <Rubidium> but I'm trying to keep the bug count due to stupid users joining a server with a wrong revision low
18:57:19 <blathijs> Yorick: And as the engineers we've been educated to be, we provide feedback :-)
18:57:37 <blathijs> And for the revision thing, feel free to hack your client to send a different revision number :-p
18:57:54 <Rubidium> never directly implement what an user wants because the user is usually wrong in how to implement something
18:58:13 <Yorick> Rubidium: well they can't JUST do that...
18:58:32 <SmatZ> "stupid users" don't know command line
18:59:08 <Rubidium> but stupid users need some "tool" to start it which uses the command prompt ;)
18:59:26 <Rubidium> like "join_my_server.exe"
18:59:54 <Yorick> I still think it's better to check that stuff client-side
19:00:33 *** NukeBuster has joined #openttd
19:00:38 <SmatZ> Yorick: anyway, why is enforcing corrent revision blocking you from anything? if you want, you can code a little patch that will imitate client revision to be the same as server's
19:00:53 <Yorick> SmatZ: join #openttd-python
19:04:53 <Yorick> and how about players that have norev000?
19:05:30 *** DJNekkid has joined #openttd
19:05:36 <Rubidium> there wasn't a norev000 server in the last 6 months, so it's not a problem anymore
19:06:33 <SmatZ> client with norev000 doesn't have working GRFs
19:07:55 <Rubidium> those clients wouldn't have been able to join any servers for a long time; haven't heard any complaint about that either
19:09:12 <Rubidium> well, except via the console...
19:09:31 <DJNekkid> im makeing a 3part articulated engine, and that works, no problem at all and it get <-> as it sould, but if i add a 2nd engine (or, 3 new parts if you wish) the sprites get <->>>> . here is the var2: -1 * 0 02 00 00 81 41 00 FF 02 AA 00 00 00 A1 00 01 01 AC 00 . I've fiddled a bit with the FF (41 00 FF), but no luck, it gets either wrong, or scrambled...
19:10:02 <DJNekkid> is it possible, or does it need to be in a power of 2 or 4 or such
19:11:28 <planetmaker> bool CircularTileSearch(TileIndex *tile, uint size, TestTileOnSearchProc proc, void *user_data) <--- I wonder how I utilize this function
19:11:29 <Eddi|zuHause2> from an uneducated viewer it looks ok
19:11:36 <glx> <Yorick> I still think it's better to check that stuff client-side <-- the rule is "NEVER TRUST A CLIENT"
19:11:49 <planetmaker> of what type or how shaped does this TestTileOnSearchProc have to be?
19:12:02 <planetmaker> I cannot find an example in the source... is it ever used?
19:12:09 <Eddi|zuHause2> but shouldn't you do "mod 3", DJNekkid?
19:13:34 <frosch123> planetmaker: newgrf_houses.cpp
19:14:12 <peter1138> Hmm, or not, I was scrolled back :o
19:14:40 <frosch123> planetmaker: but IIRC it is also used for statues
19:15:28 <planetmaker> ah, right. Thx, now found it. I guess my grep had a space too much in the search expression :P
19:15:37 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
19:17:14 <Yorick> glx: the purpose was to hold back bugs that were caused by clients joining servers via console
19:17:21 <Yorick> we could check that server-side
19:17:31 <Yorick> but client-side would be ok
19:17:54 <glx> it's very easy to patch a client to disable a client-side check
19:18:22 <Yorick> but then the client isn't making a 'mistake' anymore
19:19:04 <Rubidium> and send version is easier than send hello, receive version, send okay my version is correct
19:19:33 <peter1138> And the result is the same.
19:19:57 <Yorick> no, because a client should be able to hack something so it could join servers cross-versioned
19:20:10 <peter1138> Should? No it shouldn't.
19:20:46 <peter1138> If you wanted that, you'd not have a version check at all.
19:20:47 <glx> if you want to "fake" the revision you have to compile
19:21:11 <Yorick> peter1138: yes, to prevent clients from submitting bugs
19:22:22 <peter1138> You are not making sense. Mixing versions is never a good idea.
19:22:28 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
19:23:00 <Yorick> <blathijs>So the main reason you dislike the server side version check, is because now your python implementation can't join anymore? <-- yes...
19:23:26 <Ammler> keep in mind, there are some nice patched server around. not coop ;-)
19:23:41 <Ammler> but i.e. Kurts challenge with ladder etc.
19:24:08 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
19:24:11 <peter1138> The version appears in the UDP query, doesn't it?
19:24:18 <peter1138> So... query that if you must.
19:24:25 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
19:24:43 <Eddi|zuHause2> but he wanted to avoid UDP :p
19:24:44 <blathijs> Yorick: I would say that having a special of "I don't have a version and I am not a real player" could be added?
19:24:59 <Yorick> blathijs: you're the dev...
19:25:20 <peter1138> Not really worth it just for Yorick's request.
19:25:20 <Yorick> > I could use UDP...but it COULD fail delivering packets, and timeout
19:25:42 <Rubidium> world news: TCP can too!
19:25:43 <peter1138> I'm sure you can figure out how to do retries.
19:26:13 <joachim> Rubidium: tcp never fails!
19:26:14 <Rubidium> only TCP timeouts could take as long as 2 hours
19:26:52 <joachim> it has backup pigeons
19:27:06 <Eddi|zuHause2> TCP timeouts could as well be set to 2 years ;)
19:27:13 <Yorick> <blathijs>Yorick: I would say that having a special of "I don't have a version and I am not a real player" could be added? <-- didn't norev000 do that?
19:27:43 <Yorick> self.socket_tcp.settimeout(600000000)
19:27:44 <Rubidium> it was only that everyone could join a norev000 server
19:28:08 <blathijs> That makes more sense
19:28:30 <blathijs> anyhow, I was going to start vacuuming around an hour ago or so
19:31:42 *** DJNekkid has joined #openttd
19:34:52 <DJNekkid> on the question i asked about 15 mins ago
19:34:54 <Eddi|zuHause2> try instead of 00 FF
19:35:47 <joachim> does servicing affect reliability? or reliability affect plane crash probability?
19:36:26 <Eddi|zuHause2> DJNekkid: because for the second unit, the vehicle positons are not 0,1,2 but they are 3,4,5, and they are all >=2, so the "default" branch is always taken
19:36:59 <Eddi|zuHause2> so you must take "(vehicle postition) mod 3"
19:37:47 <Yorick> peter1138> Not really worth it just for Yorick's request. <-- how many work would it be, "if version != noplayer000 && ...", or if I would even create a patch for you...
19:37:50 <DJNekkid> Eddi|zuHause2: that is what i've tried with 41 00 03
19:38:40 <blathijs> Yorick: Things cost more than just the effor of writing code, though
19:38:41 <Eddi|zuHause2> DJNekkid: no, that is the and mask, which means mod 2^n
19:38:57 <Eddi|zuHause2> DJNekkid: that won't work with 2
19:39:07 <Yorick> blathijs: are you done with vacuuming already?
19:51:18 *** simon is now known as Guest621
19:51:41 <Guest621> hey guys. I safed a game in multiplayer mode. Now I want to continue playing it offline. But when I open it, I am Player 1. I want to be player 7. How can I achieve that?
19:52:11 <Guest621> are the commands in the wiki?
19:52:19 <joachim> doesn't work in multiplayer, tom0004?
19:52:30 <tom0004> if its a saved game, it does
19:52:41 <Yorick> joachim: he wants to continue playing it offline
19:52:44 *** gregor__ has joined #openttd
19:56:13 <Guest621> great, there even is a gui for the cheats ;-) ok, worked. thanks and bye.
19:56:37 <joachim> cheaters go to hell...
19:57:08 <Guest621> well, 1. just offline, 2. I want to continue being the player that I was when I safed it. So how is that cheating?
20:01:22 <DJNekkid> imho isnt it a cheat menu, it's a test-and-debug menu :)
20:01:51 <Eddi|zuHause2> "debug" is a common euphemism for "cheat" :p
20:02:10 <joachim> well you have the source code
20:02:25 <joachim> for single player really nothing is cheating
20:02:32 <glx> debug builds have money shortcut that aren't cheats
20:02:41 <joachim> make your own game :)
20:03:21 <Yexo> <Yorick> glx: alt-0 :-) <- my openttd just crashed because I pressed alt-0 :p
20:03:51 <Yorick> it is the shortcut to crash openttd
20:04:10 <Yorick> (why does it have a shortcut for that?)
20:04:30 <Wolf01> I want a shortcut to make trains blow up by clicking on them :D
20:04:37 <joachim> should be super + alt + f4 :
20:04:41 <glx> Yorick: to open the debugger
20:05:33 <glx> and with a little code change to check if crash.log and crash.dmp works correctly
20:05:42 <Yexo> <glx> alt-1 for money <- usefull to know for testing, save me opening the cheat menu every time
20:07:27 *** Osai^Kendo is now known as Osai
20:15:15 <peter1138> joachim: Yes and no. I think.
20:15:41 <peter1138> Oh ffs... stupid scroll back :O
20:15:49 <joachim> i think no, hence the half smiley
20:19:27 <Eddi|zuHause2> i think he answered to this: <joachim> does servicing affect reliability? or reliability affect plane crash probability?
20:19:52 <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause2 wins a... well, nothing actually.
20:20:23 <Eddi|zuHause2> great... i have everything anyway :p
20:21:04 <joachim> if the latter wasn't a disaster, reliablity should affect the probability of it.. and affect possible passengers
20:21:16 <joachim> could make air travel interesting :)
20:21:51 <Eddi|zuHause2> a crash immediately sets all nearby ratings to 0
20:22:02 <Eddi|zuHause2> that'll affect passenger numbers nicely :p
20:22:03 <joachim> should be company-wide
20:22:26 <joachim> if reliability caused it
20:22:27 <Eddi|zuHause2> i don't know... the radius is like 20 or something
20:33:19 <blathijs> dih: Are you dihedral, or is that somebody else?
20:33:40 <blathijs> dih: If so, can you tell me where the 55 client limit comes from?
20:34:07 <glx> and the limit comes from packet size
20:34:33 <Ammler> just a nice number, isn't
20:34:51 <blathijs> glx: Because the entire client list must fit in a UPD packet?
20:35:40 <Ammler> but that limit is around 12
20:36:29 <Ammler> or did he already fix it?
20:36:47 <Eddi|zuHause2> Ammler: not when you put the entire client list in an extra package
20:37:07 <Ammler> that is what dih is working on, afaik...
20:38:19 <Ammler> but then the limits are other number then 55, that was "just" imagination
20:38:54 <Ammler> the client list was disabled there for wwottdgd.
20:41:48 <Yorick> gx: it does not need that anymore
20:42:00 <blathijs> I think you could also just list the first so many clients and then end with "and more"
20:42:03 <Yorick> the udp packet with the client list got removed
20:42:15 <blathijs> Since the UDP client list is only informational
20:42:22 <blathijs> Ah, that's also a solution :-)
20:42:42 <Ammler> blathijs: that was "his" first idea... (after wwottdgd/1)
20:42:45 <Yorick> according to Rubidium, he could crash any server with it
20:43:18 <Rubidium> any unpassworded server with no passworded companies
20:43:30 <Rubidium> and I didn't remove the packet, just the client information
20:43:47 <blathijs> ie, make the data per-client a lot less?
20:44:02 <blathijs> And crashing a server by spawning infinite connections? :-)
20:44:18 <Rubidium> so only 5 characters per client?
20:44:42 <Yorick> only a part of the name would fit there
20:44:47 <Rubidium> i.e. only the first 4 characters of the player names
20:45:29 <blathijs> Rubidium: And the client id I guess?
20:45:30 <Ammler> maybe a idea for "cleaning" the server list :P
20:45:41 <Rubidium> client ids aren't sent in the udp packet
20:45:55 <blathijs> Rubidium: Then what is the fifth byte? Trailing 0?
20:46:13 <Yorick> that is currently the last byte of every string, I think
20:46:13 <blathijs> Couldn't that be simply removed? Ie, always send 5 characters (and stuff with
20:46:22 <blathijs> \0 if less than 5 characters)
20:46:35 <blathijs> not that it matters mutch
20:46:44 <Rubidium> well, I just removed the player names from it
20:46:54 <Rubidium> which solves the problem too without complexifying stuff
20:47:12 <blathijs> but you left in the first 4 characters? OR was that previously?
20:47:23 <Rubidium> no, previously it send the complete name
20:47:28 <Rubidium> and I just removed sending that
20:47:56 <blathijs> Why do you still send the first 4 chars? So people can guess a little whos is playing on a server before joining?
20:48:20 <Rubidium> blathijs: I don't send that
20:48:34 <Rubidium> it was meant metaphorically
20:48:46 <Rubidium> it just sends company info and nothing about the players
20:49:09 <Yorick> yet wouldn't it be possible to make that a tcp packet?
20:49:32 <Rubidium> previously it sent up to 100 something bytes per company and up to 80 bytes per client
20:49:40 <Rubidium> Yorick: yes, not going to happen though
20:50:44 <Rubidium> network_server.cpp:64 and further would explain it I guess
20:51:49 <Yorick> does that contain the clients?
20:52:55 <Yorick> and I don't mean a string by that
20:53:14 <Rubidium> then what do you mean?
20:53:36 <Yorick> a client_id+name for every client
20:54:19 <Rubidium> though the udp packet didn't contain that either
20:54:55 *** dasy2k1 has joined #openttd
20:55:02 <Yorick> it did contain the join date
20:55:15 *** ben_goodger has joined #openttd
20:55:36 <Yorick> which isn't sent at all now, btw
20:56:16 <Yorick> is there a reason why the ip's aren't sent to the clients?
20:57:09 <Rubidium> is there a good reason why they should be sent?
20:57:38 <Rubidium> you can't connect to like 80% anyways because they are behind some DSL/cable modem
20:58:04 <Yorick> everyone could say he's xxxxxxx while he's possibly not
20:58:34 <dasy2k1> and what does that matter?
20:58:54 <dasy2k1> if its wrong and you try to connect then you will not be able to
20:59:00 <Rubidium> ips are worthless for identification
20:59:17 <Rubidium> there are many many people who get a new IP every day
20:59:37 <dasy2k1> mine changes every time i reboot the dsl modem
20:59:44 <Yorick> sometimes I wouldn't mind to be one of them
21:00:01 <Yorick> escaping bans and such :-P
21:00:15 <dasy2k1> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/tor
21:00:28 <Yorick> dasy: can't use that with openttd
21:00:54 <dasy2k1> i would guess not, its damn slow anyway
21:01:18 <Yorick> Rubidium: why does IRC, then, send ips to its clients?
21:02:06 <dasy2k1> irc predates NAT and the likes, when IRC was new evreyone had a fixed IP
21:03:08 <dasy2k1> irc is like leftover form the days of the arpanet
21:03:24 <ln> and few people actually ran an irc client on their own computer.
21:05:33 <joachim> everyone should have a fixed ip
21:06:13 <dasy2k1> joachim: hard to do that on ip4 as there are precious little adresses left
21:06:28 <joachim> ipv6 should have been enforced as standard
21:06:28 <Rubidium> Yorick: you can use tor with openttd if you use tsocks
21:06:55 <joachim> standards rarely changes by choise :)
21:17:11 *** glx|away has joined #openttd
21:17:11 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v glx|away
21:18:31 *** glx|away is now known as glx
21:19:46 <fjb> Yes officer, I really just used OpenTTD with tor. Really, please belive me...
21:20:46 <joachim> you have the right not to send udp packages
21:24:14 <DJNekkid> i have a fixed ip... well, my modem does
21:25:54 <dasy2k1> on another topic anyone know a patchpack including paxdest newer than 13019?
21:29:15 <DJNekkid> paxdest is nice, but after a certain number of stations it "hickups" every day
21:30:13 <Ammler> you missed the discussion 4 hours ago...
21:30:46 <dasy2k1> hmm the only problem with it i have is that if you have 2 ways of getting from A to B without changing, regardless of which comes along first all passengers will wait for the faster one
21:31:54 *** Progman has joined #openttd
21:32:49 <DJNekkid> Ammler: and what did the result of the discussion come to?
21:42:26 <joachim> DJNekkid: how many stations and what hardware?
21:43:10 <DJNekkid> joachim: not sure, about 1 year old Dell D620 ... dualcore 1,8ghz (i think) and 2gb ram
21:43:22 <DJNekkid> not sure about the stations i mean
21:43:37 <DJNekkid> Intel Centrino Duo according to the sticker :)
21:44:01 <joachim> like thousands of stations or what?
21:44:42 <Eddi|zuHause2> <DJNekkid> paxdest is nice, but after a certain number of stations it "hickups" every day <- problem is not the number of stations, but the number of cargo packets
21:45:33 <DJNekkid> joachim: nope, i have 3 cities with like 10 stations in each, and on that map does it hickup
21:46:03 <DJNekkid> and btw, im talking about the socalled "new paxdest patch" on the devforum now ... the one in Roest's patch pack
21:46:14 <DJNekkid> rev 13019 or something
21:46:17 <joachim> and you don't have daily autosaves right? :)
21:46:45 <Eddi|zuHause2> joachim: the patch loops all cargo packets each day
21:46:59 <Eddi|zuHause2> which gets very slow very fast
21:47:02 <dasy2k1> tahst the patch i use
21:47:17 <joachim> Eddi|zuHause2: have not experienced that
21:47:27 <dasy2k1> dont notice that on my 2.4GHz x2 machine
21:47:57 <dasy2k1> then again i normally play with 1024x256 and low towns
21:47:59 <Eddi|zuHause2> it is easily noticeably
21:48:33 <joachim> i have 2048x2048, hundreds of stations and different routes
21:49:07 <DJNekkid> do u use daylength mod as well?
21:49:22 <DJNekkid> set to a somewhat high number?
21:49:41 <DJNekkid> oh ... should not be that noticeable then
21:50:03 <DJNekkid> but u can imagine a 1sec delay every 2,22 secs :)
21:50:31 *** Progman has joined #openttd
21:50:36 <joachim> not really, shouldn't i get a 1sec delay everi 2,22 * 3 secs?
21:51:01 <Eddi|zuHause2> my delay is a lot bigger than 1s already
21:51:02 * dasy2k1 forgot he had somthing allready eating 1 cpu core and tried to compile openttd with -j3
21:51:39 <Eddi|zuHause2> joachim: slowdowns are most noticable when you scroll during day change ;)
21:52:15 <DJNekkid> or look at a train moveing :)
21:53:09 <dasy2k1> the only real slowdown i notice is when i have masses of trians time moves slower when i can see masses of trains than when i am staring at a bit of empty land
21:53:25 <Eddi|zuHause2> i scroll all the time... and i regularly end up in completely uninhabited areas, very confusing
21:54:49 <joachim> as long as it's faster than my original ttd on 486 sx, i won't complain :)
21:55:43 <SmatZ> OTTD with 2000 trains on a 2GHz CPU is likely to be slower than TTD with 80 trains on a 80486 ;)
21:56:15 <SmatZ> as I remember playing TTD on a 33MHz, it was really slow
21:56:27 <Eddi|zuHause2> OTTD with 0 trains and ECS grfs is massively slower than TTO ;)
21:57:12 <Eddi|zuHause2> i couldn't play that, i had massive 386 flashbacks
21:57:16 <dasy2k1> i dont use ECS as i use UKRS industries instead
21:57:34 <Eddi|zuHause2> yes. PBI is much better
21:57:47 <joachim> i use pbi sometimes as well
21:58:00 <Eddi|zuHause2> joachim: "beta" does hardly count as "stable" in most definitions :p
21:59:26 <fjb> George has chosen the most complicated approach.
22:00:51 <Eddi|zuHause2> MB wanted to make his own ECS implementation
22:01:29 <fjb> MB wants to many things. Somebody should send him a lot of time.
22:02:20 <DJNekkid> just like a friend of mine ... he works 40 hour a day, 10 days a week :p
22:03:30 <fjb> 24 hours a day and there there is also the night.
22:06:02 <dasy2k1> gah, why am i allways pink?
22:07:08 <fjb> Hm, maybe Dasy sounds a bit girlish...
22:07:23 <tom0004> think of it a salmon, not pink ;)
22:08:32 <dasy2k1> tis true that my nick is not any definate gender but...
22:08:59 <dasy2k1> opennttd dousent know taht i still insists on making me pink
22:09:47 <fjb> OpenTTD knows you better than you think.
22:10:31 <dasy2k1> have you ever seen a pink bus in RL that is not the campaign vechle for the LGBT liberation front?
22:11:23 <fjb> Did you ever see the pink elephants of the DB advertising campaign?
22:11:58 <dasy2k1> what are adverts? since i got a PVR i dont see any
22:14:16 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
22:14:20 <SmatZ> I see ads (billboards..) everytime I leave home :-P
22:15:03 <DJNekkid> dasy2k1: you just start watching the tvshows 30 minuts to late? :)
22:15:28 <dasy2k1> then you can just fast forward the ads out
22:15:52 <dasy2k1> unless its bbc of course then there arnt any to begin with
22:16:15 <SmatZ> one can go to a toilet or so
22:16:26 <dasy2k1> thast what the pause button id for
22:16:26 <DJNekkid> with PVR can u pause the show :)
22:16:45 <DJNekkid> but dasy2k1: does it tape all channels at once? ;)
22:16:55 <DJNekkid> my wife is a man when it comes to zapping
22:17:20 <dasy2k1> i just scroll thu the on screen listings
22:19:31 <Rubidium> dasy2k1: I've seen a pink train though
22:20:30 *** Osai is now known as Osai^zZz
22:20:49 <dasy2k1> i seem to remember central trains havving one witha an all over vinal
22:21:27 <DJNekkid> lol, i were wondering why the TE didnt change, and i had saved the nfo, ran the batchfile that encode and copy, and pressed "apply" new graphics...
22:21:34 <DJNekkid> i were workin' on the wrong train
22:23:21 <fjb> Don't take the wrong train...
22:25:19 <DJNekkid> im not takeing trains, im codeing them :)
22:25:51 <DJNekkid> hence the "why isnt some shit working"-questions some times
22:35:47 <dasy2k1> or however you spell it basically the whole train was covered in stickey back plastic (cheaper for temp livery than a full repaint)
22:39:20 <fjb> Yeah, music without drm...
22:40:03 <Eddi|zuHause2> how do you dare dismiss drm ;)
22:40:47 <DJNekkid> vinyl isnt that bad, but nothing beats (imho) a CDJ1000 mk3
22:43:43 <DJNekkid> it beats any SL1210 anyday :)
22:44:38 <Eddi|zuHause2> in german we say "ich verstehe nur bahnhof" :p
22:47:25 <CIA-3> OpenTTD: truebrain * r13777 /branches/noai/src/ai/ai_info.cpp: [NoAI] -Fix: GCC can give silly warnings just like MSVC ..
22:53:23 <Tefad> i got lucky there. usually /b/ is a bit more uh.. worse.
22:53:40 <Tefad> (obviously i didn't mean to paste here)
22:59:02 *** Sacro1 is now known as Sacro
23:15:45 <Brianetta> r13773 - I submitted a patch that did this back in the four-figure revisions.
23:16:11 <Brianetta> Of course, it was completely ignored...
23:16:21 *** fjb is now known as Guest641
23:17:10 <Eddi|zuHause2> !openttd commit 137733
23:17:15 <Eddi|zuHause2> @openttd commit 137733
23:17:15 <DorpsGek> Eddi|zuHause2: Commit r137733 doesn't exists
23:17:19 <Eddi|zuHause2> @openttd commit 13773
23:17:19 <DorpsGek> Eddi|zuHause2: Commit by rubidium :: r13773 /trunk/src (network/network_server.cpp settings.cpp) (2008-07-21 13:05:43 UTC)
23:17:20 <DorpsGek> Eddi|zuHause2: -Codechange: disable autoclean for protected/unprotected companies when the timeout is set to 0. Based on an idea by Thomas.
23:17:54 <Brianetta> It was four extra lines of code, and not based on an idea by Thomas.
23:18:17 <Brianetta> In fact, "Brianetta's Nightly" had this code, since it didn't affect the game state at all.
23:18:43 <Brianetta> Clients didn't need the patch, and I just lied about the version.
23:34:26 *** ben_goodger has joined #openttd
23:36:16 <rortom> Rubidium: thanks for working on my ticket
23:36:41 <rortom> glx: you committed your patch for the fake chat msgs into the trunk?
23:44:06 <rortom> do you want to continue to test the protocol for flaws?
23:44:11 <rortom> i could help you with that
23:55:38 *** ProfFrink has joined #openttd
continue to next day ⏵
