IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2011-06-07
⏴ go to previous day
00:13:06 *** Intexon has joined #openttd
01:14:19 *** fjb is now known as Guest3679
01:32:03 *** hgnmu128 has joined #openttd
02:26:45 *** rhaeder has joined #openttd
03:36:08 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
03:45:19 *** Kurimus has joined #openttd
04:43:16 *** ar3k is now known as ar3kaw
04:56:19 *** Eddi|zuHause has joined #openttd
05:14:39 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
05:56:38 *** Eddi|zuHause2 has joined #openttd
06:15:37 *** Br33z4hSlut5 has joined #openttd
06:51:03 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
06:57:01 *** Cybertinus has joined #openttd
07:16:39 *** jonty-comp has joined #openttd
07:20:43 *** PierreW has joined #openttd
07:26:43 *** Bjarte_ has joined #openttd
07:27:27 *** Bjarte_ is now known as Bjarte
07:33:15 *** ashledombos has joined #openttd
07:48:21 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
08:11:26 *** TWerkhoven has joined #openttd
09:19:36 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
09:41:13 *** keky___ has joined #openttd
09:41:55 *** Adambean has joined #openttd
10:02:46 <peter1138> does it load locally on your pc?
10:03:17 <aZ> VPS is ubuntu, incase that matters
10:03:23 <aZ> ive been trying for 2 days
10:03:27 <peter1138> missing newgrfs on the server?
10:04:20 <aZ> can i check that from the shell?
10:06:41 <Terkhen> that error is quite strange
10:07:20 <Terkhen> oh, there is another in the middle
10:07:32 <Terkhen> aZ: you changed NewGRFs ingame probably
10:08:26 <aZ> there are no newgrfs when I run it from my local machine
10:08:46 <aZ> when i look at it in scenario editor
10:08:56 <Terkhen> which version are you running on windows and which one at your server?
10:09:47 <Terkhen> the savegame is quite old, right?
10:09:59 <Terkhen> could you upload it somewhere so we can check it?
10:10:48 <aZ> i can but maybe we should check ive got it right
10:11:34 <planetmaker> the savegame must be quite old
10:12:08 <Terkhen> even if it is old it should be loaded correctly, but it might have some bug that is detected in recent versions
10:12:18 <aZ> i downloaded a scenario file that was for 0.7, i opened it in 1.1 scenario editor and saved it. i then started the scenario and made the sav which I uploaded
10:12:41 <planetmaker> oh... scenario files may be arbitrarily tempered with
10:12:58 <planetmaker> some on bananas are _quite_ ugly, if not unusable
10:13:41 <aZ> ah, was confused with the difference between .scn an .sav
10:14:33 <planetmaker> but what bothers me with your paste is that generating the random map failed
10:14:54 <planetmaker> Or do you get successfully a (random) map?
10:15:46 <planetmaker> do you have a link to the sav / scn in question?
10:16:17 <aZ> yeah ive successfully test a random map, connected to it fine
10:17:20 <aZ> i needed version 2 of this map because it uses more Scottish town names
10:18:19 * peter1138 wonders if nibbling on coffee beans is perhaps not the best idea
10:18:58 <Terkhen> I can't find many of the NewGRFs on that scenario on the online content
10:19:21 <Terkhen> are you sure you have those?
10:19:43 <Terkhen> well, this was the first question that was asked :P
10:19:58 <Terkhen> if you don't have all NewGRFs games will fail
10:19:59 <aZ> dont have them local either but the map still works?
10:20:08 <Terkhen> no, your game will fail at some point
10:20:39 <planetmaker> aZ, locally it *might* work. But a network server has to have in all cases 100% the exact matching NewGRFs. Also compatibility doesn't suffice
10:21:38 <aZ> what about finding those newgrfs?
10:21:56 <aZ> yous got access to an archieve or something?
10:22:25 <planetmaker> Many from that are not in our online content archive.
10:22:47 <planetmaker> you gotta search forums or grfcrawler for it. Probably unsuccessful, too, though
10:22:58 <planetmaker> I haven't heart of many of those :-P
10:23:15 <Terkhen> I would ask the scenario creator directly
10:23:38 <aZ> how about editing the scenario to remove those newgrfs?
10:24:22 <planetmaker> newgrfs are part of the map...
10:25:02 <aZ> one of them was viaduct.grf for example, wouldnt mind if there wasnt ciaducts
10:26:10 <aZ> thanks for all the help guys
10:26:54 <planetmaker> us a height map ;-)
10:41:09 <Bilge> Is there a newgrf that adds a lot more working industry types? There was a pack that came with the UK scenario but it doesn't work
10:41:35 <planetmaker> firs, ecs newgrfs, pbi
10:42:05 <planetmaker> opengfx+ industries actually, too. You can there combine the default industries somewhat arbitrarily
10:42:13 <planetmaker> thus you'll have more, too
10:43:12 *** Eddi|zuHause2 is now known as Eddi|zuHause
10:43:23 <Eddi|zuHause> damn... i was too quick in the shop, and grabbed fanta mango...
10:43:33 <Bilge> So there's three separate projects?
10:43:38 <Bilge> Or do they work together somehow
10:43:45 <Eddi|zuHause> they don't work together
10:43:52 <Yexo> you can only use one of them at the same time
10:44:11 <Yexo> if you mean they work together as in share work: some of the graphics are shared IIRC
10:44:13 <planetmaker> they'll deactivate in the presence of other industry newgrfs
10:44:20 <Bilge> No I meant can you combine them
10:44:29 <planetmaker> Not at all. Don't even try ;-)
10:44:59 <Yexo> Bilge: there is a limit of 32 different cargo types. Each of those newgrfs is already close to that limit (but each uses some different cargo types)
10:45:32 <Bilge> I don't see a section on the forums for newgrfs
10:45:54 <planetmaker> in the newgrf section ;-)
10:45:58 <planetmaker> also call graphics section
10:46:26 <Bilge> They are more than just graphics though right? They also contain logic
10:46:35 <planetmaker> yes. They can even be only logic
10:46:51 <planetmaker> historical reasons, I guess
10:47:09 <Yexo> previously they were in the "ttdpatch graphics" section, that was even more confusing
10:47:35 <planetmaker> hm... maybe it should be renamed to Transport Tycoon Add-ons Development :-)
10:47:45 <planetmaker> or s/Add-ons/NewGRFs/
10:47:50 <Bilge> Do you have an opinion on which of those three is the best, i.e. most comprehensive? Save me time trying to find a thread for each of them
10:48:12 <planetmaker> Bilge, as co-author of both FIRS and OpenGFX+Industries I might be biased ;-)
10:48:31 <Bilge> You might also be correct
10:48:45 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
10:48:51 <planetmaker> it really depends, though. They all three are quite different from how they influence the game and what playing style they 'require'
10:48:54 <Yexo> Bilge: neither of them is best. PBI is most strict with stockpile limits, that is why I personally don't like it. Other find that a very good feature however
10:49:05 <Bilge> I noticed that both of you listed them in the same order, maybe that's subliminaly your order of preference :3
10:49:29 <Yexo> opengfx+industries has the least changes from the default industries, I'd strongly recommend it over just using the default industries as it improves the graphics in several situations
10:49:32 <Bilge> Stockpile limits? Like how much is waiting in a station?
10:49:44 <planetmaker> no. for processing at an industry
10:49:45 <Yexo> no, how much you can deliver to an industry per month
10:50:14 <Yexo> so for a steel mill you have to deliver both coal and iron ore. If you stop supplying iron ore the steel mill will stop accepting coal after a while
10:50:17 <planetmaker> we've only met once in our lives ;-)
10:51:56 <planetmaker> Bilge, I suppose that 90% of the channel's participants here are younger than me. At least ;-)
10:52:38 <Bilge> I kind of like that mechanic Yexo since it makes more sense but I'm surprised that a "graphics pack" can introduce such a significant feature
10:52:45 *** Intexon has joined #openttd
10:52:47 <Bilge> I am not accustomed to the power of newgrfs
10:52:59 <planetmaker> consider newgrfs not graphics but mods
10:53:08 <Yexo> that is exactly why questions "which is best" cannot be universally answered :)
10:53:19 <Bilge> I wish they were called that since "newgrf" is a really strange name particularly for a newcomer
10:53:40 <planetmaker> and as 'mods' they're also integral part of a map - and cannot be removed or added after game start ;-)
10:53:59 <planetmaker> Bilge, you're totally right :-)
10:54:17 <Bilge> I guess you have no way of knowing which mods work together
10:54:32 <Bilge> i.e. no way to prevent conflict than by trial and error
10:54:36 <planetmaker> But this format developed over the last >6(?) years or so
10:55:00 <planetmaker> thus it grew from simple graphic replacements, over simple changes of few things to what we have now. And still extend now
10:55:17 <Bilge> I appreciate that but it's never too late to give it a new name and simply call them mods going forward
10:55:19 <planetmaker> Bilge, you can basically only test. Or read the Newgrf descriptions
10:56:01 <planetmaker> Bilge, also true. But... I have the feeling it's not time yet. This format is shared with another game - which makes things even more complicated
10:56:06 <Yexo> Bilge: one of the problems I have with "mods" is that "mod" can be more easily confused with source code patches
10:56:12 <Yexo> which are also "mods" in a way
10:56:38 <planetmaker> also good name. But what about AIs then?
10:56:48 <Yexo> no problem there I'd say
10:56:52 <Yexo> just keep calling those AIs
10:56:59 <planetmaker> they're also plug-ins of sorts ;-)
10:57:26 <planetmaker> that's double naming
10:58:05 <TWerkhoven> i suppose if banana's gets sections, ai's could get their own section just like infrastructure or trains, but still all would be plugins
10:58:14 *** douknoukem has joined #openttd
10:58:15 <planetmaker> they have their own there...
10:58:27 <planetmaker> as do base grfs. and height maps and scenarios
10:58:39 <planetmaker> that's why it's BaNaNaS
10:58:50 <Yexo> TWerkhoven: AIs are not coded in the grf format, but in the squirrel language
10:59:04 <Yexo> there are also different rules for changing AIs in a running game
10:59:05 <planetmaker> Base grfs and Newgrfs and NoAIs and Scenarios
10:59:13 <Yexo> so they're conceptually different from newgrfs
10:59:17 <Bilge> What is the other game?
10:59:51 <Bilge> It sounds like a patcher for the same game
10:59:52 <Yexo> actually is a modification of the original transport tycoon deluxe game
11:00:18 <Bilge> Like something you would use to install mods because the game itself doesn't support such a feature
11:00:25 <Bilge> Some pretty poor naming conventions going on around here :P
11:00:44 <Yexo> TTDPatch existed long before OpenTTD
11:01:07 <Yexo> however OpenTTD has by now implemented almost all features TTDPatch has (and a lot more)
11:01:23 <Yexo> noticeable missing feature is custom bridge heads
11:01:26 <planetmaker> TTD is the common ancestor. TTDPatch was there around pretty soon then. And OpenTTD is a rewrite of the same game
11:02:04 <planetmaker> but neither TTD nor TTDPatch are really much maintained anymore
11:02:28 <planetmaker> thus OpenTTD is where nearly all development happens
11:03:01 <Bilge> OpenTTD is amazing by the way, really good job on that. I played the original game when I was a kid, still got it on Microprose CD, but OpenTTD makes the game accessible on todays systems while also breathing new life into the game. I can't live without autoreplace. I could put up with it when I was a kid but replacing mass amounts of old vehicles isn't fun
11:03:06 <Yexo> Bilge: a few years ago the "advanced settings" menu was called "configure patches", that really was confusing
11:04:02 <planetmaker> He, but now you also have much more vehicles and much larger maps. So sure, that needs new tools for mass-management ;-)
11:04:04 <Bilge> Speaking of advanced settings, I was sure there was a setting to control how frequently the game creates new industries during play but now I can't find it anywhere. DOes it exist?
11:04:18 <planetmaker> only in the new game settings
11:04:35 <planetmaker> hm, also there... I wonder how they relate :-)
11:04:36 <Bilge> I kind of dislike how scenarios bypass game settings
11:04:53 <planetmaker> Bilge, they're that: 'scenarios'. Crafted to pose a challange
11:05:13 <Eddi|zuHause> manually replacing engines isn't as problematic when you
11:05:19 <Eddi|zuHause> are limited to 80 trains
11:05:26 <Eddi|zuHause> and a tick takes 2 seconds
11:05:44 <planetmaker> was 80 the limit?
11:06:10 <Eddi|zuHause> 80 trains, 80 rv, 40 planes, 40 ships iirc
11:06:19 <Eddi|zuHause> and 360 vehicles in total (including wagons)
11:06:30 <Bilge> There needs to be a new type that includes terrain and towns/industries then because sometimes I just want to play the scenario with my own settings but a height map doesn't include settlements and industries
11:06:56 <Yexo> that is a work in progress (or at least was) by alberth
11:07:01 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: yes, that is probably one of the next developments
11:07:25 <planetmaker> it makes sense to have a newgrf-independent scenario type, yes
11:07:30 <planetmaker> and setting-independent
11:08:48 <planetmaker> a cross-breed of height map and scenario :-)
11:08:57 <Bilge> Have you noticed that when you browse the newgrf respository you get a nice description about what it does but after you've downloaded it you can't see that description any more
11:09:13 <Bilge> So if you end up with newgrfs in your library due to scenarios downloading them then you have no way to retroactively discover what they do
11:09:20 <Eddi|zuHause> i complained about that multiple times
11:09:29 <Yexo> you can still read a description in the newgrf info window
11:09:40 <Bilge> Yeah but it's not the same one
11:09:43 <Yexo> if the grf doesn't have a good description there, complain to the grf author
11:09:44 <Bilge> It's often missing or obscure
11:10:04 <Eddi|zuHause> it was very restricted in length in the past
11:10:15 *** Vikthor has joined #openttd
11:10:24 <Yexo> it's only limited by the amount of space available in the window
11:10:34 <Yexo> which scales if you resize it, so that's not an argument anymore
11:10:45 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but that was like 3 lines in older TTDPatch
11:11:01 <Yexo> and in openttd versions before the new newgrf window
11:11:28 <Eddi|zuHause> and a majority of (important) GRFs are way older
11:12:06 <Eddi|zuHause> but the readme viewer could solve that
11:12:26 <Bilge> You also have no way of visiting any links in descriptions, even by copying text
11:12:33 <Eddi|zuHause> or a way to access the bananas description
11:12:47 <Yexo> bananas description is also very limited in size
11:12:52 <Eddi|zuHause> yep, copying or opening browser is ... non-trivial
11:13:02 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has joined #openttd
11:13:27 <planetmaker> Bilge, we'll need a way to copy&paste and open browsers on all OS ;-)
11:13:44 <planetmaker> and opening browsers (which?) is not trivial
11:13:54 <Eddi|zuHause> not "all" OSes, but the most common ones.
11:14:09 <Yexo> linux variants are the hard part wrt opening a browser
11:14:14 <Bilge> I'm not too worried about opening the browser but being able to copy text is pretty important
11:14:41 <Eddi|zuHause> Windows is probably easiest, but also Mac OS X, and various Linuxes (Debian, Ubuntu, Suse) with desktop environments (KDE, Gnome, other)
11:14:55 <planetmaker> it may sound like not much, but it means to change A LOT, Bilge ;-)
11:14:57 <Bilge> Although I realise there's actually no selection and copying scheme in the game at the moment besides maybe the input boxes
11:15:02 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: the implementation complexity is probably equal for both features
11:15:20 <Terkhen> paste is actually implemented on windows
11:15:33 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: wagons can be selected, and vehicles drag&dropped
11:15:52 *** Chris_Booth has joined #openttd
11:15:56 <Eddi|zuHause> but that is probably not helpful
11:16:01 <planetmaker> I can paste it on windows and osx
11:16:11 <Terkhen> for linux I looked into paste support from SDL, it seems that the feature has been in development since 2004 or so
11:16:14 <planetmaker> helpful for server IPs
11:16:15 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: getting it to mark the text is almost trivial
11:16:34 <Bilge> Really? So what's the complication? Cross-platform clipboards?
11:16:41 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: getting the text into the clipboard is problematic
11:17:51 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, if you can read the clipboard it should by its sister or brother routines also be feasible to write it...
11:18:27 <planetmaker> I think half the work will be to enable the option to select texts...
11:18:29 <Bilge> It seems that ECS was the pack that came with the UK scenario that didn't work but the version is beta 5 from 2009 and when I look in the newgrf repository there is a version from just last month. I take it scenarios stay linked to a specific version?
11:18:41 <planetmaker> maybe not, though
11:19:04 <Bilge> Is there an easy way to upgrade the grfs for an out of date scenario?
11:19:29 <planetmaker> none to no easy and definitely not reliable
11:19:48 <planetmaker> updating industry grfs is a no-no
11:20:43 <Yexo> Bilge: it's impossible because newgrfs can contain so much logic
11:21:03 <Yexo> industry type 0 could be a coal mine in version1 and a steel mill in version 2 of the same grf
11:21:05 <Bilge> So bananas is keeping track of all versions of a newgrf even though I can only browse the latest versions?
11:21:05 <Terkhen> yes, we should have a way for decoupling scenarios from newgrfs
11:21:19 <Eddi|zuHause> in theory, ECS grfs should be update-able
11:21:24 <Bilge> So what if I want to target a specific version to download?
11:21:26 <Yexo> OpenTTD has no way of knowing the IDs have changed or how to link existing industries to the new ids
11:21:28 <Eddi|zuHause> but we do not take warranty
11:21:57 <Yexo> if you have a scenario / savegame / server that uses that specific version you can still download it
11:21:58 <planetmaker> Bilge, the "latest" is what you need for new games.
11:22:05 <Bilge> Yexo: sure but what if the scenario has no industries at present, it only has loaded the old newgrfs for the industries, isn't there some way I can swap out the old ones for the latest versions?
11:22:35 <Yexo> enable the scenario developer setting, open grf window, remove old ones, add new ones
11:22:40 <planetmaker> hm, no industries. Then yes
11:22:54 <Yexo> ^^ might cause problems ranging from graphics glitches to crashes of openttd
11:23:02 <Yexo> as soon as you do that consider that savegame unsupported
11:23:16 <Yexo> so try for a small game, but don't do it for a game you plan to play for a long time
11:23:31 <planetmaker> :-) that basically sums it up
11:23:42 <Bilge> Is there any particular reason why industries would have different IDs? I mean would the developer have to have made that change manually or are they "compiled" in some way such that the compiler assigns the IDs... keeping in mind I have no idea about newgrf development
11:23:44 <Yexo> I've seen bug reports from people losing a game they'd played for 2 years (as in actual years, not game years) that way
11:24:01 <Yexo> the developer would have to change that
11:24:05 <planetmaker> and not only one of those reports...
11:24:31 <Bilge> Are newgrfs compiled or just packaged?
11:24:31 <Yexo> my example above was a bit simplistic and not one that would happen normally, but it could be decided that the steel mill was no good industry and another one should be included
11:24:37 <planetmaker> Bilge, it needs manual change. But we've seen that. We've been there
11:24:50 <Yexo> you can decompile them just as easily though, grfcodec does both
11:25:55 <Bilge> Is there any reason why ECS is about 10 newgrfs and FIRS is just conveniently in one?
11:26:01 <Bilge> Like a technical limitation or something?
11:26:10 <planetmaker> a technical limitation of TTDPatch ;-)
11:26:33 <Bilge> So its pandering to obsolete technology?
11:27:05 <planetmaker> depends on the meaning of 'obsolete' and whether you consider ttdpatch obsolete
11:27:26 <planetmaker> It can also be argued to be convenience. You can thus easily select different industry sectors
11:27:37 <Terkhen> for ECS it makes sense, you can select different combinations of industries easily
11:27:40 <planetmaker> like a farming scenario, you just add ecs base, town and farms
11:28:49 *** Eddi|zuHause has joined #openttd
11:30:37 <Bilge> But there's "base" and "base2"
11:31:05 <Bilge> I have no idea what this means and whether I'd need both. What happens if you forget to include base? Do you get a user friendly error message or does everything blow up
11:31:50 <Yexo> not sure, I think the other ecs grfs will just disable them self if base is missing
11:33:07 <Bilge> Does the newgrf format support a "depedency" system?
11:33:36 <Bilge> It seems like a good thing to have
11:34:03 <planetmaker> not sure. Doesn't make things easier
11:34:19 <planetmaker> a newgrf can check for the presence or not-presence of other newgrfs already
11:34:30 <Terkhen> it can be supported already IMO
11:34:35 <planetmaker> which is usually enough info
11:34:46 <Terkhen> a NewGRF could disable itself if one of its dependencies is missing
11:34:47 <planetmaker> including the other grf's configuration parameters, that is, of course
11:35:19 <Bilge> I'm just concerned with how the user is made aware about a grf disabling itself
11:35:30 <Terkhen> a huge red warning appears
11:35:36 <Bilge> If I think to the WoW addon dialog that was pretty good
11:35:53 <Bilge> You can't enable an addon if its dependencies are missing and you're informed of exactly which ones are required
11:36:07 <Bilge> Disabling a dependency immediately greys out mods that require it
11:36:15 <planetmaker> comparing something to WoW is like comparing it to building style from other planets to me ;-)
11:41:23 <Hirundo> It'd be possible to add a 'dependency list' via action14 ...
11:42:01 <Hirundo> I don't know if there are any hard dependencies besides ECS, though
11:42:21 <planetmaker> there'll be ukrs add-ons maybe
11:42:39 <Hirundo> In such cases disabling is fine, IMO
11:42:48 <planetmaker> or other newgrfs modifying other existing ones
11:42:59 <planetmaker> in the other cases IMHO, too
11:43:04 <Hirundo> It's not like you really want the UKRS add-on, and consider the normal UKRS to be a side-effect
11:43:23 <planetmaker> of course not :-)
11:44:29 <planetmaker> I'm not yet convinced we need such system, though
11:44:40 <Terkhen> "disable myself if one of these grfids is not present", it would also be nice to have "disable myself if one of these grfids is present"
11:44:44 <Terkhen> but that can be done already
11:44:47 <Yexo> a better solution is imo to add a "test" stage to newgrf loading
11:44:58 <Yexo> that means all actionB errors can be detected while still in the main menu
11:45:18 <Hirundo> Doesn't TTDP do the same already?
11:45:32 <Yexo> in ttdpatch you can't change the newgrfs inside the game
11:45:36 <planetmaker> it'd need a sand-box rather
11:45:37 <Yexo> so there is doesn't matter at all
11:45:57 <Hirundo> I'm sure there is a 'test' grf loading stage defined somewhere
11:46:01 <Bilge> planetmaker, you said you're part of the FIRS team, right? What's a "town industry"?
11:46:30 <planetmaker> sorry, I'm missing a bit context :-)
11:46:31 <Yexo> Hirundo: the idea is not original, it was discussed before
11:46:39 <planetmaker> I think it's like shops, bakeries and alike
11:47:03 <Bilge> On this page, in italics in every section it says After discussing numerous times, town industries won't be implemented as houses.
11:47:12 <Bilge> But what the hell is a town industry
11:47:26 <planetmaker> yes, shops, petrol stations, bakeries,...
11:47:36 <Yexo> industries that only appear inside towns
11:47:37 <Hirundo> from TTDP wki: Test: Called when user clicks to enable/disable file in the GRF Status Window to check which other files react to the change. Ignores all actions except 6, 7, 8, 9, B, D and E.
11:47:37 <planetmaker> those cargo accepting things which are found usually in towns
11:47:51 <Hirundo> That's basically what you want, right?
11:48:32 <Yexo> only in the main menu, not in-game
11:49:00 <planetmaker> maybe one could evaluate that on the fly after the active grf list is changed
11:49:11 <Terkhen> Bilge: banks and water towers in default ttd are town industries
11:54:58 <Bilge> I've never seen a water tower though
11:55:13 <Bilge> Can you transport water or something?
11:55:18 <planetmaker> you never played tropical climate then ;-)
11:55:36 <Bilge> I prefer green to brown
11:55:52 <Bilge> I thought it was just visual, didn't realise the game was different
11:55:53 * planetmaker wonders where there's brown in the tropical climate ;-)
11:57:08 <Bilge> It would be pretty cool if, when selecting a landscape style, the background changed to preview it
11:57:57 <planetmaker> NewGRFs can change that. So pretty pointless
11:58:10 <planetmaker> unless you already create a game
11:58:20 <planetmaker> which then would have no vehicles, no nothing... pretty boring
11:58:58 <Bilge> newgrfs can change the stock four climate types?
11:59:01 <Yexo> planetmaker: I think Bilge means to have one opntitle.dat per climate
11:59:13 <Yexo> and newgrfs can't change the small image in the main menu
11:59:16 <planetmaker> Yexo, yes. That's what I replied to
11:59:21 <Yexo> simply because they are not loaded at that point in time
11:59:26 <planetmaker> The tiles can all be newgrf modified. Thus a preview will fail
11:59:54 <Yexo> Bilge: newgrfs can change every single sprite that is used in game
12:00:08 <planetmaker> even change an "a" for a "v" ;-)
12:00:17 <Bilge> Well that may be the case but anyone who is screwing with newgrfs probably knows what they're doing, it's still useful for new players, and besides that it probably is still useful to be able to preview the grfs sets anyway
12:00:29 <planetmaker> Bilge, 90% don't ;-)
12:00:30 <Yexo> the majority doesn't know what they're doing :)
12:00:46 <Bilge> But I can't really see a downside of having a "opntitle.dat" for each climate
12:01:04 <Yexo> there isn't really a downside to that I think
12:01:04 <planetmaker> it'll be broken by design
12:01:08 <Yexo> somewhat bigger download size
12:01:21 <planetmaker> it won't preview what you get as soon as you have newgrfs.
12:01:23 <Bilge> It's not a big file is it?
12:01:25 <Yexo> having to reload the main menu when you change the climate, which means the various subwindows are closed
12:01:49 <Yexo> not really, but then openttd isn't a big download either
12:03:35 <planetmaker> still, it'll give complaints immediately - promising something which is not there.
12:04:08 <planetmaker> the only way I see is to generate a random game as background and start AIs there
12:04:18 <Yexo> that'll cause even more problems
12:04:47 <Bilge> Fixed is better because you're showcasing the majority of visual elements in one screen
12:04:55 <Yexo> I guess the FS#4631 / r22534 kind
12:05:02 <Yexo> AIs were never intended to run in the main menu
12:05:23 <Yexo> and it'll lead to such ugly examples in the main menu that it's not a good idea anyway
12:05:44 <planetmaker> depends on the AI ;-)
12:06:12 <Bilge> I just created a town and the game named it "Little Slutford"
12:06:30 <planetmaker> see. That's what you get from messing with it! ;-)
12:06:48 <Bilge> Population: 268 little sluts
12:07:02 <planetmaker> but yes... AIs in the main menu might not be a good idea anyway
12:09:41 <Terkhen> Bilge: please refrain from using using foul language
12:10:48 <Bilge> planetmaker the graphics in FIRS look amazing, who made them?
12:11:14 <Bilge> What part do you work on?
12:11:32 <planetmaker> some small code fixes here and there, some compatibility stuff. And the build system
12:12:23 <planetmaker> in other words: it's open source ;-)
12:13:17 <Bilge> I think you need to avoid using colloqualisms in game dialogs though
12:13:37 <Bilge> Like: Production "steps up" if two or more cargos are delivered...
12:13:46 <Bilge> Should be: Production "increases"
12:14:05 <Yexo> Bilge: those are strings from the FIRS newgrf
12:14:14 <planetmaker> I won't judge that... andy is native speaker
12:14:14 <Bilge> Yeah I was talking to planetmaker
12:14:30 <Bilge> And so am I but I'm thinking of non-native speakers
12:14:39 <Bilge> That kind of phrase should be avoided
12:15:54 <planetmaker> Bilge, we happily accept suggestions for improvement. Best grab that file and correct it where needed
12:16:19 <Yexo> that way it can be discussed with andy more easily and it won't be forgotten
12:20:06 <planetmaker> in case of doubt: the main primary language is British English. A separate American English translation can be selected / provided for cases where it matters
12:21:12 <Bilge> I am British but idioms shouldn't be used in any language for game text
12:21:36 <Bilge> This isn't too good either: "This industry might close unless any cargo is delivered within"
12:21:48 <planetmaker> that's pretty clear IMHO
12:21:57 <Bilge> Should be: "This industry may close if no cargo is delivered within"
12:22:20 *** Chris_Booth is now known as Booth
12:22:23 <planetmaker> but as said... :-) please provide a revised English language file with your corrections
12:22:35 <Bilge> I don't know how to do that
12:22:46 <planetmaker> grab the file Yexo linked and edit it...
12:22:49 <Yexo> download the file, edit in any text editor, save it, upload it to the issue tracker
12:23:30 <Bilge> It's the uploading part I don't get
12:23:50 <planetmaker> you'll need to register to the BugTracker
12:24:02 <Yexo> there is a "files" field, you can upload your file there
12:24:14 <planetmaker> Then you can open issues with the link as given ^
12:28:19 <Bilge> So it seems that FIRS gives me lots of new industries and cargos and absolutely no way of transporting any of them anywhere
12:28:44 *** tycoondemon has joined #openttd
12:29:02 <planetmaker> you necessarily need vehicle newgrfs, if you want to be able to transport all those cargos
12:29:26 <Terkhen> if FIRS gave you its own vehicles, you would be limited to only those vehicles
12:29:28 <planetmaker> nearly any will do, but you need one ;-)
12:29:44 <Terkhen> if you don't want many changes on vehicles try opengfx+ trains and opengfx+ road vehicles
12:30:18 <planetmaker> ships-> FISH. RV, trains: as terkh3n just said. aircraft: probably av8, but others might work, too
12:34:37 <Bilge> This is what I mean about having a dependency system
12:34:51 <planetmaker> Bilge, but it doesn't depend on any particular vehicle set
12:35:03 <Bilge> If you try to start a game with just FIRS it should say: hang on you don't have any vehicles
12:35:26 <Bilge> On some level they have to be designed to work with each other
12:35:36 <planetmaker> but how do you test for *something* which you don't know how it looks like?
12:36:04 <Bilge> newgrfs should have a classification
12:36:13 <Bilge> So you can create a cargos newgrf
12:36:29 <planetmaker> industries and cargos usually go hand in hand
12:36:41 <Bilge> And that newgrf says, I need a grf for ships, planes and aircraft
12:36:50 <planetmaker> though in principle it can be split. But when you define an industry you need to be sure that those cargos are there
12:36:55 <Bilge> And then it won't start the game until you load a grf that provides each of those interfaces
12:37:10 <planetmaker> that doesn't suffice. It needs to tell "I need cargos X,Y,Z,..."
12:37:21 <Bilge> That would be a lot better yes
12:37:28 <Yexo> why should openttd forbid me to load a game without planes if I don't want to play with planes at all?
12:37:42 <Bilge> It doesn't have to be a hard limit
12:37:51 <Bilge> An "are you sure" dialog would suffice
12:38:04 <Yexo> nobody reads those, or they complain anyway after reading
12:38:16 <Yexo> that kind of dialog is just annoying and hardly helpful
12:38:36 <Bilge> I would say that the use case for the majority of the time is that a grf should enforce some kind of integrity with regards to what other grfs it is coexisting with
12:38:40 <planetmaker> still, it's a valid point to notify the user that he's about to start a game where there are certain cargos without means to transport via X or Y
12:39:03 <planetmaker> need not be a pop-up window but a part of the config window could in principle do, too
12:39:06 <Yexo> again the problem with the way newgrfs are currently loaded: that information is not available until _after_ the game has been generated
12:39:16 <Bilge> It would be very good if you actually got a dialog that said exactly what was expected but missing. Like, the following cargos have no transports defined: x y z
12:39:40 <planetmaker> Bilge, that'd be VERY lengthy in this case ;-)
12:39:57 <Bilge> Further, a complex grf like FIRS should also recommend to the user other grfs that it is compatible with
12:40:10 <Yexo> ok, now say there is a maglev wagon available to transport food. That maglev wagon is the only wagon that is able to transport food, but it's only available from 2030. Should OpenTTD warn about that or not?
12:40:31 <Bilge> How am I to know what grfs are out there that provide the missing pieces? Right now I'm only just discovering that there are missing pieces
12:40:42 <planetmaker> Bilge, read FIRS' readme
12:40:47 <Yexo> you could read the readme.txt file provided with firs?
12:41:02 <Bilge> I don't know where to see that, I just used the content downloader in gam
12:41:11 <Yexo> that is a very valid problem
12:41:24 <Yexo> and somebody was working on adding a grf reader to the game
12:41:40 <Bilge> I should become product manager for OpenTTD :)
12:42:06 <planetmaker> oh, definitely not. There are always people who want to manage things
12:42:13 <Bilge> There's so much good stuff in OpenTTD but there's so much more you can do with it to make it more accessible and enjoyable for more players
12:42:15 <planetmaker> But you could certainly contribute a lot :-)
12:43:11 <planetmaker> The problem mostly is not so much the knowledge of "what would be nice" or even "what is needed to improve X" - but rather someone actually implementing that
12:43:53 <planetmaker> we know about the missing access to readmes. We know that scenarios are a PITA wrt re-configuring to other newgrfs.... but it simply has not yet been solved
12:44:53 <planetmaker> I also know that the game menu in general and the arrangement of settings could need an overhaul. Mostly time disallowed me to work on it.
12:45:09 <George> Yexo: not sure, I think the other ecs grfs will just disable them self if base is missing <- no. they can run alone
12:45:11 <planetmaker> Same with other things mentioned and many more. It needs people really working on it
12:45:28 <planetmaker> Doing the hard work. Not the 'management'
12:45:32 <Yexo> George: ok, good to know :)
12:46:34 <George> Bilge: Is there any reason why ECS is about 10 newgrfs and FIRS is just conveniently in one?<- TTDP has a limit -32K lines per GRF. ECS Mashinery vector and ECS Agricultural vector are at this limit
12:46:52 <George> do not know if OTTDP supports more than 64K lines
12:47:10 *** Booth is now known as Chris_Booth
12:47:13 <planetmaker> it's good to know though where things can be improved. And all your observations are valid ones afaik, especially wrt user interface
12:47:21 <Yexo> afaik there is no hardcoded limit, but I'm not sure if the grf spec supports it
12:47:44 *** Markavian has joined #openttd
12:47:46 <planetmaker> but it's a lengthy process to really write that. And to write it such that all corner cases are covered and without breaking backward compatibility too hard
12:48:22 <George> Bilge: But there's "base" and "base2" <- they are not a must. So for farming scenario you'll need Town + Agricultural
12:49:43 <planetmaker> George, that's actually quite confusing naming
12:49:55 <planetmaker> from the names I'd expect to need base + <something>
12:50:24 <George> Eddi|zuHause: in theory, ECS grfs should be update-able <- they should. Let me know if not. When big change happens, GRFID is changed. The vector becomes version II (Basic, Chemical)
12:50:25 <planetmaker> btw, other topic: I think gimp can be made to work with the layer names. I shall look at that when I find some time. But probably not before the end of the week really
12:52:03 <Yexo> planetmaker: I'm trying now how hard it is to write a pcx decoder for PIL
12:53:12 <Bilge> I find it werid that grfs have a "line" limit since I was told grfs are compiled in which case there is no concept of "lines"
12:53:41 <Yexo> not really, but a grf is divided in "sprites"
12:53:57 <Yexo> there are real sprites (the actual graphics) and pseudo sprites (the one containing data and logic)
12:54:16 <Yexo> each "sprite" is also called a "line" (to avoid confusion with "real sprites")
12:54:52 <Bilge> planetmaker: I appreciate what you're saying, and I am a developer by profession, but C is not my strong suit. That said, from the discussion we had just in the past few hours it seems pretty clear to me that we have discussed some things that haven't been thought about in any kind of detail yet
12:55:05 <Yexo> "pseudo sprites" are also called "actions"
12:55:53 <Yexo> Bilge: that's true, and a detailed plan on how something could work is always welcome
12:55:58 <planetmaker> he, nice, Yexo :-)
12:56:19 <Yexo> however an open source project works inherently different from a company
12:56:24 <Bilge> Because it's easy to say, "a dependency system would be nice" but it takes a lot of work to go through and turn that into a detailed plan on how a programmer could actually go away and implement that idea
12:56:26 <Yexo> you can't tell anyone "you have to code that"
12:56:43 <Terkhen> most of the things discussed today have also been discussed in the past, but as Yexo mentions a detailed design and plan is needed
12:57:07 <Yexo> Bilge: if you want to volunteer to create such a detailed plan I can only say: go right ahead :)
12:57:27 <planetmaker> A good place might be our wiki somewhere
12:57:30 <Yexo> the wiki (wiki.openttd.org) could be a good place to write it, that way it's possible for other to collaborate when that's needed
12:57:36 <Bilge> I thought my knowledge of the grf format and interface is far too lacking for me to do that right now
12:57:41 <planetmaker> the development pages would be a suitable place
12:58:16 <planetmaker> you might not want to start with that ;-)
12:59:06 <Terkhen> regarding the scenario issue, there are plans to expand heightmaps with more info until they can define a "generic" scenario that does not depend on anything else
12:59:27 <Terkhen> but no detailed format definition (unless Alberth has something decided already)
13:03:20 <planetmaker> and indeed, any such change must be interesting enough so that *someone* wants to take it on ;-)
13:04:19 <Terkhen> hmm... the newgrf debug gui code is quite complicated :P
13:05:05 <planetmaker> you mean the debug windows?
13:05:12 <planetmaker> which show the variables?
13:05:49 <Eddi|zuHause> "in berlin, one third of all juristic actions are for 'using public transport without ticket' ['Schwarzfahren']"
13:06:15 <Terkhen> it is very powerful too
13:06:46 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, sounds like pointless waste of public money
13:07:22 <Terkhen> one of my friends had to pay a fine for that when we were at berlin a few years ago :P
13:11:19 <Eddi|zuHause> i can imagine that the issue has gone worse since all the public transport blackouts, in order to protest.
13:11:32 <Eddi|zuHause> those are the kind of people who won't just pay the 40€
13:11:58 <planetmaker> must be an incredible amount
13:19:42 <Eddi|zuHause> while at the topic: how does "schwarzfahren" translate to other languages?
13:20:03 <Eddi|zuHause> or is that a purely german issue ;)
13:22:33 <Yexo> "schwarzfahren" in google translate: "go black" :p
13:22:46 <Yexo> the dutch one results in "black car"
13:23:58 <planetmaker> :-P sounds wrong either case
13:24:34 <Yexo> the dutch one results in "black car"
13:24:45 <Bilge> planetmaker: does FIRS modify the value of passenger cargo because in a standard TTD game I can make millions just using bus and plane population transport; ignoring industry altogether
13:25:34 <Bilge> I still haven't found any incentive to make use of industry besides for the fun of it
13:26:01 <Yexo> you can also argue the other way around
13:26:15 <Yexo> it's perfectly possible to make a lot of profit using industries, ignoring passengers altogether
13:26:24 <Bilge> No my point is that industry is less profitable
13:26:40 <Yexo> that depends on city size and your playing style
13:26:46 <planetmaker> dunno how transport rates compare. I never care about them
13:26:54 <Bilge> Particularly early game, when trains are slow and expensive
13:27:09 <planetmaker> and towns tiny and scarce ;-)
13:27:22 <Yexo> without any newgrfs planes are more profitable than other transport tyeps, but that isn't limited to passengers
13:27:38 <Bilge> I didn't think there were planes for goods
13:31:33 <Terkhen> default vehicles are refittable to goods and valuables IIRC
13:32:37 * planetmaker wants to fly in coal by jumbo jet.
13:32:48 <planetmaker> it's even realistic somewhat... Berlin air lift
13:34:15 <Terkhen> opengfx+ aircrafts? :P
13:34:34 <planetmaker> :-) Might be pretty straight forward. Nothing really needed except refits
13:34:34 <Terkhen> and a setting: "refit to cargos that don't make sense"
13:34:34 <Eddi|zuHause> if you could simulate soviets blocking all road/rail/water entrances to the city :p
13:34:49 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, I can
13:35:01 <planetmaker> just build a line of communication towers
13:35:05 <planetmaker> the "iron curtain"
13:35:11 <Terkhen> there was a scenario like that
13:35:12 <planetmaker> at sea level hight
13:35:18 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: but that does not cut existing rail lines
13:35:50 <Terkhen> it is awesome how they managed to synchronize that huge water clock :P
13:36:06 <planetmaker> :-) In the Sony centre?
13:36:21 <Terkhen> hmm... I'm talking about the scenario :P
13:36:41 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: did they hack that one yet? :p
13:36:48 <planetmaker> Hm... then I don'T quite know.
13:36:54 <planetmaker> no idea, probably, Eddi|zuHause ;-)
13:37:48 <Terkhen> I found the map a few years ago in the wiki, let me check if it is still there
13:38:22 <planetmaker> I'm not sure I remember that... you seem to recall another one than I...
13:41:00 <Yexo> Terkhen: I remove a bunch of scenarios from the wiki some time ago.
13:41:10 <Yexo> removed all those whose links didn't work anymore
13:41:51 <Terkhen> I wonder why they did not upload it to the forums or something
13:42:36 <Terkhen> planetmaker: it had a line of lighthouses connected to a long line of land at water height that was being flooded slowly
13:42:55 <Terkhen> when the right date was reached, water reached the lighthouses and started destroying them
13:43:15 <planetmaker> wow. That sounds like awesome timing
13:43:22 <Terkhen> you still had both parts separated by water, but it was great :P
13:43:28 <Yexo> hmm, I remember that scenario
13:45:57 <Terkhen> another piece of content that falls into oblivion because of external storage, I guess
13:48:48 <planetmaker> hm.. broken savegame
13:48:52 *** Zeknurn has joined #openttd
13:49:03 <Terkhen> why do they force you to register? meh
13:49:47 <planetmaker> he, I tried to load the webpage then obviously :-P
13:49:57 <planetmaker> which of course is a broken scenario ;-)
13:50:49 <Terkhen> the forum itself looks broken
13:51:53 <Eddi|zuHause> the only external scenario i ever tried was the USA map
13:52:05 <Eddi|zuHause> IMHO it heavily suffers from "flatness"
13:52:26 <planetmaker> many scenarios based on topography do
13:52:30 <Eddi|zuHause> but rivers are great
13:52:58 <Terkhen> they are a pain to place :P
13:53:11 <Terkhen> I got bored of it after just two rivers
13:53:27 <Eddi|zuHause> Terkhen: since the whole map is hand-drawn, i don't think the rivers really make a significant part of that :p
13:54:03 <Terkhen> the link in that forum is broken even if you register
13:54:15 <Terkhen> s/register/use bugmenot/ :P
13:56:57 <Terkhen> heh, while googling I got redirected to an old archive of this channel, it is a fun discussion :P
13:57:14 <Eddi|zuHause> old discussions are often fun ;)
13:57:36 <Eddi|zuHause> try to read logs from exactly 1 year ago ;)
13:58:13 <Terkhen> but I was here already one year ago, this one is like reading old story for me :P
14:01:12 <Eddi|zuHause> didn't Gonozal_VIII make one of those IN-attempts?
14:02:04 <planetmaker> integrated nightly
14:02:09 <Eddi|zuHause> same as a patchpack ;)
14:02:11 <planetmaker> i.e. a nightly patchpack
14:04:33 <Eddi|zuHause> the name "NukeBuster" is very close to "NekoMaster", makes for bad associations...
14:05:31 <Terkhen> wow, this channel really loved to write back then :P
14:06:01 <Eddi|zuHause> there were always periods of more talk, and others of less talk
14:07:03 <planetmaker> it's not like this has been a silent day...
14:07:44 <Yexo> more surprising: most of the talk today has actually been about openttd ;)
14:07:58 <Eddi|zuHause> that is indeed rare :p
14:07:58 *** amkoroew has joined #openttd
14:08:33 <Eddi|zuHause> and they didn't pick up on my attempts of derailing the topic ;)
14:09:34 <planetmaker> hm... I like those scenarios which have a CC-ND license :-P
14:09:41 <planetmaker> You may look at it, but not play ;-)
14:09:56 <Yexo> you can play, but not upload screenshots / savegames :)
14:10:07 <Terkhen> Eddi|zuHause: that is the fun discussion I was mentioning :P
14:10:22 *** Progman has joined #openttd
14:10:56 <fjb> I hate it when my prediction become true.
14:13:30 <planetmaker> I also wished you were wrong. Not generally, but here ;-)
14:16:11 <Terkhen> anyways, I can't find the scenario so you will have to believe me about what it did :P
14:20:53 <Eddi|zuHause> <ln-> so, still missing: mecklenburg-vorpommern, saarland, sachsen, berlin, hull. <-- has any of that been checked yet? :p
14:22:11 <Bilge> When did "refitting" become part of the game? I know the original never had it
14:22:48 <Eddi|zuHause> iirc TTD already had ship refitting, TT(O) didn't
14:23:03 <Eddi|zuHause> or at least was one of the very first TTDPatch ammendments
14:26:59 <Bilge> I never heard of the deluxe version, I just owned the original. Wikipedia doesn't even say when the delux version was released, just that it was "shortly afterward"
14:27:06 <Bilge> Does anyone know when TTD was released?
14:27:29 <Eddi|zuHause> 1994 original, 1995 world editor, 1996 deluxe
14:27:52 <Bilge> Oh wait it does say at the top heh
14:27:58 <Eddi|zuHause> i never heard of deluxe either
14:28:08 <Eddi|zuHause> until like 2001-ish
14:28:14 <Eddi|zuHause> when i got internet
14:28:34 <Eddi|zuHause> and played something like TTDPatch 1.6/1.7
14:28:34 <Bilge> I think even if I had seen it I would have just dismissed it as rebranding
14:29:46 <Eddi|zuHause> alone for the one-way-signals it would have been worth purchasing
14:36:29 <Bilge> I still haven't used them even now
14:37:04 <Bilge> As I understand they're only useful for closed circuit tracks but because I was bought up on the orignal games I never think about building that way
14:37:27 <Bilge> Besides I still feel like tracks like that have very little application in most circumstances
14:37:55 <planetmaker> you could IMHO not be more wrong ;-)
14:38:01 * Terkhen used to think that way too :P
14:38:08 <planetmaker> two-way block signals are the only signal type I NEVER build
14:38:18 <planetmaker> the normal two - way block signals
14:38:46 <Eddi|zuHause> they have very narrow use cases
14:38:56 <planetmaker> _very_ narrow :-)
14:39:00 * Terkhen would love a signal GUI with one way block signals and path signals only
14:39:12 <Eddi|zuHause> sharing a one-track-station between several otherwise independent lines with one train each
14:39:30 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, but there a path signal is IMHO more appropriate
14:39:58 <planetmaker> or at least equally feasible
14:40:08 <Eddi|zuHause> in _all_ "real" cases, path signals are more or equally appropriate
14:40:27 <Eddi|zuHause> only weird "priority" constructs actually need block signals
14:40:45 <Eddi|zuHause> i haven't used block signals in ages
14:40:54 <planetmaker> I use them on normal tracks
14:41:01 <planetmaker> and, of course, for priority lines
14:41:15 <Terkhen> why wasn't recommended to build path signals on normal tracks?
14:41:42 <planetmaker> not that. But a train might stop, to "think" about reservation
14:41:51 <planetmaker> that's only done every 20(?) ticks by default
14:42:08 <planetmaker> or you change that to 1 tick - then it impacts performance slightly afair
14:42:31 <planetmaker> we change it on our servers to one tick ;-)
14:42:37 <planetmaker> the !setdef command takes care of that
14:42:45 <Bilge> I use these newfangled "path" signals exclusively. I never use block signals. But I still don't create closed circuits
14:43:21 <planetmaker> nor do you use double-tracked routes, eh?
14:43:37 <Bilge> Don't know what that means
14:45:41 *** ashledombos has joined #openttd
14:47:03 <planetmaker> for example: one track going North, the other South
14:47:30 <planetmaker> connecting the same stations basically, in parallel
14:47:43 <planetmaker> each connecting to every station track
14:48:02 <planetmaker> but (mostly) allowing only uni-directional traffic (for higher train density)
14:50:06 *** ashledombos_ has joined #openttd
14:52:36 <Bilge> If there's two trains on a dual line then that sounds inefficient to me
14:53:25 <Bilge> I'd probably use a single platform and either have a partially parallel section so they can bypass each other or a mandatory stop at the depot
14:53:44 <Bilge> Depending on how long it takes to load up
14:54:24 *** Vikthor has joined #openttd
14:56:03 <planetmaker> you never had then a station with more than 100 trains visiting it ;-)
14:56:46 <Bilge> Do you kno why, even though a scenario downloaded AV8 1.81, I'm offered 1.501 as an "upgrade"
14:57:34 <Yexo> the av8 addon has 1.501 as dependency IIRC
14:58:01 <Bilge> I don't think so, I played with 1.81 by itself
14:58:19 <Bilge> But I'm seeing both in the list and 1.501 gets checked when I click "select upgrades"
14:59:05 <planetmaker> because 1.3x + 1.5x have a different ID than 1.8x?
15:00:11 <Bilge> I can't seem to see that
15:01:34 <Bilge> What is the DOS/Windows palette thing and does it matter if some default to DOS while other Windows (mixing them)?
15:01:49 <planetmaker> but they are 44440A01 vs 44440A03
15:02:12 <Bilge> Shouldn't they have the same ID if they're the same mod?
15:02:17 <planetmaker> "don't change defaults" is in 99% a good idea
15:02:22 <Bilge> Just different versions of the same MOD I mean
15:02:26 <Yexo> planetmaker: huh? I have multiple versions of av8, but all of them are 44440A01
15:02:33 <Yexo> 1.331, 1.501, 1.7 and 1.81
15:02:48 <planetmaker> Yexo, but the av8 extra aircraft have another ID
15:02:57 <Bilge> Not talking about the extra
15:02:59 <planetmaker> which is 44440A03
15:03:07 <Bilge> I have duplicate of the base back
15:06:22 <planetmaker> I have three different base sets to choose from. But definitely not in the newgrf window
15:07:25 <Bilge> Yexo: for refittable vehicles would it be possible in the purcahse window to include the refit cost? This instead of having to buy it first
15:07:26 <planetmaker> I understood that... But still not the sense of your statement.
15:07:41 <Bilge> Sometimes the refit costs as much as the original vehicle. OpenGFX Road Vehicles the refit is free
15:07:44 <planetmaker> Bilge, not possible
15:07:48 <Bilge> Knowing the refit cost up front would be a lot better
15:08:18 <planetmaker> the newgrf decides on the refit costs
15:08:19 <Terkhen> hmm... should it be? I never worried about refit cost in OpenGFX+ Road Vehicles
15:08:40 <Bilge> The refit is free in that mod
15:08:41 <planetmaker> Terkhen, I decided that "free" is as justified as "expensive". I chose free
15:08:45 <Bilge> But in the base game refits are expensive
15:09:11 <planetmaker> As to me it made no sense to pay big $$$ when transporting ore instead of coal in the same wagon
15:09:17 <Bilge> I remember buying a diesel train and refitting it from passenger to something else and it costing the same as the train in the first place
15:09:37 <planetmaker> Bilge, in any case: bother the newgrf authors
15:09:44 <planetmaker> it's their choice
15:09:55 <Bilge> They can set the cost but that's not the point, I just want whatever the cost is displayed in the purcahse window
15:11:11 <Terkhen> Bilge: IIRC the problem is that the refit cost can depend on vehicle values that do not exist until the vehicle is actually bought
15:11:45 <Terkhen> therefore, with some NewGRFs you would get huge differences between what is displayed on the buy window and the real cost
15:11:46 <planetmaker> as it can be "1000$ on February 29, 750 in May, 100 all other days, except Fridays where it's 259, but Friday 13 is 100000 and no refit possible in 1974 or after 2019
15:12:10 <Yexo> Bilge: the newgrf decides the price, but the newgrf can also display it in the purchase window
15:12:11 <planetmaker> oh, and that was only valid when it carries currently coal. All different when it currently carries ore
15:13:26 <planetmaker> a good vehicle newgrf author indeed could display that there. I wonder if *any* newgrf does that
15:13:30 * planetmaker is an evil newgrf author
15:13:40 <Terkhen> NewGRFs can display additional stuff there :P
15:13:51 <Bilge> Refit is part of the game though. What if there are no newgrfs installed? I still want to see the refit price
15:13:53 <planetmaker> yeah... VEH_CB_TEXT_PURCHASE_SCREEN
15:14:41 <Bilge> Terkhen: even if that's true you can still display "Estimated refit cost"
15:15:21 <planetmaker> a newgrf author can know it exactly - in principle
15:15:34 <Terkhen> why should we show information that we know can be false? you underestimate how confused users would get about it
15:16:32 <Bilge> When you hold shift to test building it also declares "estimated cost" because it knows things can change between when you did the test and actually build the road
15:16:45 <Bilge> That doesn't mean the feature was omitted because you assume users are stupid
15:16:56 <Yexo> but at that time the vehicle is already build
15:17:14 <Yexo> which is different, because with an already build vehicle openttd can ask the newgrf about the refit cost
15:17:30 <Yexo> as long as there is no vehicle I'd have to create one, get the refit cost, and delete it
15:17:39 <Yexo> which is possible, but a lot more work
15:17:57 <Terkhen> it's not a matter of users being stupid or not, it's a matter of users assuming that the info shown to them is correct when it is actually wrong
15:18:22 <Bilge> "Estimated" is used to dispel that instinct to assume
15:18:41 <planetmaker> an estimation which can be off by orders of magnitude?
15:18:45 <Terkhen> for example: "Estimated refit cost: 0"
15:18:52 <Terkhen> and later the real refit cost is 100.000$
15:18:59 <planetmaker> we could always use that then or the other ;-)
15:19:09 <planetmaker> easy fix actually ;-)
15:19:14 <Terkhen> the best solution IMO is to ask NewGRF authors to display an estimate
15:19:31 <planetmaker> STR_REFIT_ESTIMATE: Estimated refit cost: 0 ;-)
15:19:35 <Bilge> It isn't because it's inconsistent and still doesn't add the information to the base game
15:20:17 <planetmaker> consider base game as "easy". But everything added _also_ has to hold for newgrfs
15:20:59 <Terkhen> that's the problem Bilge, because of how callbacks are handled for real vehicles and vehicles in the buy menu, this is already inconsistent
15:21:05 <Terkhen> so you are going to get inconsistent solutions
15:24:20 <Bilge> planetmaker: FIRS says it is compatible with eGRVTS v1.0, which is exactly the version I am using, but it does not provide any vehicles for transporting alcohol
15:24:53 <planetmaker> that's unfortunately correct. FIRS readme is older than its alcohol cargo ;-)
15:25:36 <planetmaker> please open a ticket or I'll forget...
15:25:44 <Bilge> I don't know how to do that
15:26:03 <planetmaker> same way as translation / language fixes...
15:26:04 <Bilge> What would you do about it? Remove it from the readme?
15:26:27 <planetmaker> "all excep alcohol". I can't fix egrvts. It's not mine
15:27:05 <Bilge> If it's abandoned can't we fork and fix it?
15:27:19 <planetmaker> the license afaik allows it. yes
15:27:33 <planetmaker> the author is still around, though. But very busy atm
15:27:42 <Terkhen> it's not abandoned though, Zephyris still plans to update it some day
15:28:21 <planetmaker> egrvts needs also some other fixes. Like adoption to realistic acceleration
15:29:09 <planetmaker> I wonder in what shape the egrvts source is...
15:29:22 <planetmaker> and whether we should sweet talk Zephyris to just upload it to the DevZone
15:29:27 <planetmaker> Whether he'd have time for that
15:29:36 <planetmaker> then maybe a 1.4 could be made. maybe
15:29:55 <planetmaker> but I fear the answer to "how does the source look like?"
15:30:12 <planetmaker> do you know how it looks?
15:30:15 <Terkhen> it's NFO, you can't make it much worse than it is :D
15:30:35 <planetmaker> there's nfo, there's de-compiled nfo and there's nfo ;-)
15:30:37 <Terkhen> it can't be worse than uncommented, long lines right?
15:30:51 <planetmaker> And I know the pain I went through with TTRS
15:30:56 <planetmaker> nothing I fancy doing really
15:31:22 <Terkhen> I tried to understand 2cctrainset code myself and I failed, and it is commented
15:31:42 <planetmaker> but that's easier than uncommented
15:31:57 <planetmaker> 2ccTS has not exactly an easy-to-understand code base anyway
15:32:19 <Ammler> isn't there a nfo-nml converter for firs?
15:32:22 <planetmaker> and if it's only because of its size
15:32:36 <Terkhen> Ammler: it is still not finished, action14 and other things are missing
15:32:37 * planetmaker looks under the desk for Yexo.
15:32:42 <planetmaker> He must be hiding *somewhere* :-P
15:32:44 <Terkhen> but the converted version compiles and can be run :)
15:33:01 <Terkhen> it will disable itself because something is missing, though
15:33:09 <Terkhen> but the resulting code is... not nice
15:33:15 * Yexo looks for a better place to hide
15:33:26 <Terkhen> nicer than expected, but still chaos :P
15:33:44 <planetmaker> well... I guess there's only so much one can do with a de-compiler
15:33:59 <Terkhen> I'm willing to translate the converted code to proper NML for FIRS, but it is not something I fancy doing for many other sets :)
15:34:06 <planetmaker> and there are light years between nfo and nml code for me ;-)
15:34:24 <Terkhen> when with proper I mean variables with meaningful names and so on
15:34:34 <Terkhen> templates, organized code...
15:34:40 <Yexo> var[x] to the correct name can be done automatically
15:34:41 <planetmaker> that's darn hard work
15:35:02 * Terkhen guesses that after the conversion he will never forget sed syntax again
15:35:27 <planetmaker> sed -i.bak "s/blubber/fancy/g"
15:35:50 <Yexo> planetmaker: I've given up on trying to implement a xcf decoder for PIL for now
15:36:16 <Yexo> the documentation is missing a lot of information, and I'm pretty sure it can't be done in pure python, it'll need some c code
15:36:26 <planetmaker> where is the exact problem? - oh :S
15:36:29 <Ammler> what is the issue there with using gimp console?
15:36:32 <Yexo> which makes distributing / testing harder
15:36:43 <planetmaker> Ammler, the "size" of gimp as tool
15:36:58 <planetmaker> and we'd have python anyway as dep for all our repos
15:37:03 <planetmaker> So it'd be more light-weight
15:37:15 <Yexo> and if pil supported those files, nml could too :)
15:37:27 <Ammler> well, gimp is a kind of require anyway
15:37:42 <Yexo> Ammler: only for artists, not for coders
15:37:48 <Ammler> maybe you can do the same with photoshop?
15:38:00 <planetmaker> Ammler, my script supports photoshop
15:38:05 <Ammler> Yexo: which coder doesn't need a graphics tool?
15:38:05 <planetmaker> gimp reads it just fine
15:38:26 <Rubidium> maybe do it the same way as OpenTTD does openttd.grf?
15:38:32 <Ammler> planetmaker: I meant to use photoshop instead gimp
15:38:54 <planetmaker> Rubidium, but there everything is as png, right?
15:39:12 <planetmaker> I don't see openttd.grf using any layered graphics file anywhere
15:39:16 <Ammler> planetmaker: I guess, he meant, add the png to the repo and use gimp if available
15:39:28 <Rubidium> well... yes, but I mean openttd.grf itself, not the source for openttd.grf
15:39:28 <planetmaker> that's what we do use currently
15:39:29 <Terkhen> yes, I have been thinking about adding pngs to the repo too
15:39:44 <Terkhen> planetmaker: not in ogfx-rv right now :P
15:39:47 <planetmaker> ho, ogfx+rv doesn't, ok :-)
15:39:48 <Rubidium> i.e. recompile it when the tool for doing that is available
15:39:59 <Rubidium> otherwise just keep the precompiled binary
15:40:09 <Rubidium> it'll somewhat mess up the repository though
15:40:10 <planetmaker> ah... you mean... only "re-gimp" if gimp is there? yes
15:40:24 <Terkhen> and also, some way of compiling without using gimp, even if gimp is present
15:40:27 <planetmaker> but that means either all png anyway or the grf. Both is... not so nice
15:40:41 <Terkhen> convert from xcf to png would be a special target
15:40:54 <Terkhen> and by default, use pngs
15:40:55 <planetmaker> iirc it is currently
15:41:21 <planetmaker> it works currently like xcf newer than png? then re-gimp the png
15:41:35 <planetmaker> that check just needs making dependent on the availability of gimp
15:41:36 <Terkhen> oh, nice, that's enough IMO
15:41:52 <Terkhen> I'll readd the pngs to the repo then
15:41:55 <planetmaker> obviously xcf is always newer than no png file
15:42:05 <planetmaker> Terkhen, sure you want that?
15:42:07 <Ammler> Terkhen: just call those different as the other pngs
15:42:28 <Terkhen> planetmaker: right now it takes way too long to compile
15:42:31 <Terkhen> Ammler: what do you mean?
15:42:38 <planetmaker> Let's say... please don't be too quick with it.
15:42:41 <Ammler> something like .gimp.png
15:42:54 <planetmaker> Terkhen, does it always take that long?
15:42:59 <Terkhen> Ammler: there are no "other" pngs on ogfx-rv, everything can be generated from xcf
15:43:02 <planetmaker> even when you didn't touch the xcf?
15:43:10 <Terkhen> and IIRC they are already being called .gimp.png
15:43:20 <Terkhen> planetmaker: I don't remember
15:43:31 <Ammler> Terkhen: then it might not matter :-P
15:43:49 <Terkhen> well, .gimp.png is still better for consistency, if other ogfx projects start using the same scheme
15:43:52 <planetmaker> Terkhen, it *should* - whether it does or not - only re-create the png if the xcf is newer. thus compilation only should take longer if the pngs are re-written
15:44:02 <Terkhen> so only the first time
15:44:11 <planetmaker> that's how it should be.
15:44:33 <planetmaker> and for every time changing graphics ;-)
15:45:40 <planetmaker> yes... seemed to work for me.
15:45:49 <planetmaker> make just build the nml. after clean it builds the png
15:46:35 *** hgnmu128 has joined #openttd
15:46:50 <planetmaker> hm, good. It also works with gimp 2.4 :-)
15:47:11 *** hgnmu128 is now known as Guest3758
15:48:18 *** Guest3758 is now known as hgnmu128
15:48:22 <planetmaker> but indeed takes *quite* some time
15:50:38 <hgnmu128> I have a doubt. The GRVTS 32bpp package is just a tar with the *_z?.png etc files inside it, where is the code to import them into the game located? In the GRF?
15:52:12 <Yexo> when openttd has to read real sprite with number x from the grf, it'll try to load "grfname/x_z?.png" first
15:52:19 <Yexo> only if that fails it'll load the sprite from the grf
15:52:36 <hgnmu128> And it happens only if blitter is set?
15:53:02 <planetmaker> a blitter is always set - except on most dedicated servers ;-)
15:55:10 <hgnmu128> But I have GRVTS.grf where GRFname string is "GRVTSv1.4" but the tar name is "GRVTSv1.4c.tar". So it searches for grfname*/X_zY.png?
15:57:40 * hgnmu128 is waiting, fingers crossed. ;)
15:59:28 <hgnmu128> Yexo, planetmaker, anyone?
15:59:56 <Yexo> the tar name doesn't matter, the name of the directory inside the tar does
16:00:20 <Yexo> the _zY part is not part of OpenTTD, only of the extra zoom levels patch
16:00:46 <Yexo> the grf name string doesn't matter, the filename of the grf matters
16:00:52 <hgnmu128> The (only) directory inside the tar is "sprites".
16:01:13 <Yexo> and inside the sprites directory?
16:03:30 <hgnmu128> Now, there's a new doubt? Wouldn't OTTD have to search all TARs in data/ directory for EVERY SINGLE GRF?
16:04:51 <hgnmu128> Full loop through the data/ dir per grf? Is that why loading a preset with a lot of GRFs take a long time?
16:04:57 <planetmaker> that's why my startup is not really quick ;-)
16:05:44 <hgnmu128> Is it done for all GRFs in the directory or those selected via NewGRF Settings?
16:06:18 <planetmaker> everything is searched for upon startup. And then things are cached
16:07:04 <hgnmu128> Cached for the same instance only or for the next time as well?
16:07:08 <planetmaker> so that openttd knows where it finds stuff
16:07:18 <planetmaker> until you rescan or exit
16:07:48 <planetmaker> and some other ops also force a re-read afair
16:09:42 <hgnmu128> And I often thought #openttd was deserted because most OPs and members were away. It seems that it was the doubts which were away.
16:10:07 <hgnmu128> Thanks for the help, planetmaker, Yexo. Good night.
16:32:52 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
16:39:17 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
16:41:34 <planetmaker> hm... some things I just don't understand: there's been an open day at the German army and obviously it has been allowed to children to use a targeting system or "came in contact with weapons" under supervision. Obviously that for some reason is not allowed... what point is an open day at the army then?
16:43:26 <lugo> planetmaker, they called that little village were the children were 'fighting' after a town in bosnia which was involved in conflicts in ww2 and in the 90s again
16:44:16 <planetmaker> Dunno. That definitely is unfortunate naming then. But the principle is even questioned or said to be illegal
16:45:24 <Eddi|zuHause> it might be morally questionable to advertise weapons to kids, but there is nothing "illegal"
16:45:26 <planetmaker> I mean... what do those boys do otherwise? They sit at home and play CS or whatever. Or go outside and the same...
16:47:03 <planetmaker> I think there's a difference between advertising violence and war as conflict solutions and a "hands on experience" so to say.
16:49:50 *** |Jeroen| has joined #openttd
16:59:36 <Eddi|zuHause> i remember being at an open day in the army as a child
16:59:48 <Eddi|zuHause> that was 1988-ish
17:00:06 <planetmaker> That was another army than I visited in my childhood ;-)
17:00:13 <Eddi|zuHause> although that was a ... different army :p
17:00:35 <planetmaker> I know for sure that I then was on the driver's seat of a battle tank
17:00:45 <planetmaker> as well as the gunner's place
17:01:33 <Eddi|zuHause> they had camouflage nets and different vehicles, but i don't remember anything specific
17:01:49 <Eddi|zuHause> a radar dish i remember
17:02:36 <planetmaker> the only other thing is that they made a kind of show / maneuvre combining ground troups and helicopters. Was a good show ;-)
17:03:00 <planetmaker> at least impressed me back then
17:03:14 <Eddi|zuHause> they tore down that army base last year
17:03:16 <planetmaker> probably 25 years ago :-P
17:55:32 *** Alberth has joined #openttd
17:55:32 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Alberth
17:55:52 <CIA-10> OpenTTD: frosch * r22546 /trunk/known-bugs.txt: -Doc [FS#4635]: Add 'trains do not crash with their own wagons' to known_bugs.
18:24:31 <Bilge> Is it planned to make locks realistic so that enclosed areas have to fill up before boats can travel upstream? Or will they always just float upstream against the flow
18:25:27 <frosch123> it is not planned to make them jump like in ttdp when reversing the ship inside the lock :p
18:25:27 <Belugas> at elast, not from me. you mentionned the R word
18:25:45 <Belugas> and what frosch123 said too :)
18:26:22 *** JVassie has joined #openttd
18:26:52 <Yexo> Bilge: currently ships ignore each other
18:26:55 <Alberth> Bilge: The goal of the game is to provide fun rather than being realistic
18:27:11 <frosch123> anyway, without interaction the ships in ttdp actually go ___|¯¯¯¯
18:27:19 <frosch123> i.e. they stop in the middle and raise/lower slowly
18:27:25 <Yexo> when you want to change locks like that ships would have to be aware of each other or you'll get very wierd results when a ship going downstream and one going upstream meet
18:28:17 * Alberth would like that patch :)
18:34:15 *** Intexon has joined #openttd
18:34:52 <Eddi|zuHause> feature request: roadvehicles loading in second place at a drive through stop move to front position if the first vehicle leaves
18:35:46 <Eddi|zuHause> (especially if on timetabled wait or full load, if not actually loading)
18:37:07 <Bilge> I don't understand the argument that realism and fun are mutually exclusive
18:37:26 <Bilge> If you want that kind of "fun" make trains ignore each other as well and remove disasters from the game
18:38:01 <Bilge> As it stands right now you can push mass amounts of ships over land using a single width channel
18:38:16 *** tokai|noir has joined #openttd
18:38:44 <Bilge> The cost of taking a shortcut over land with ships should be that locks take time to operate
18:38:46 <Eddi|zuHause> "realism" and "fun" are not mutually exclusive
18:38:52 <Yexo> not without penalty: ships are very slow, so you lose income
18:38:52 <Eddi|zuHause> and nobody said that
18:39:01 <Yexo> also canals are very expensive
18:39:20 <Eddi|zuHause> just "realism" as the _only_ support argument for a feature request is like having no argument at all
18:39:39 <Bilge> Along with making them operate correctly you could probably reduce the cost a bit also
18:39:59 <Bilge> As I tried to explain, it's not the only argument
18:40:14 <Bilge> You can send a hundred ships down a single width channel over land without any real penalty
18:40:36 <Bilge> Whereas with all other forms of transport you must provision adequately to provide throughput in any kind of volumew
18:41:03 <Bilge> In that way ships are a bit broken right now
18:41:16 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but if you want to solve that, you need other ways to direct and manage ships, like you can do with signals and trackbits with trains
18:42:20 <Bilge> It should be a given that a single width canal is one way as soon as the first ship enters it
18:42:22 <Eddi|zuHause> imho ships should still be able to pass through each other, but docks should be limited to one ship at a time
18:42:27 <Eddi|zuHause> (or 3, one on each side)
18:42:28 <Bilge> If you want a two-way canal then it needs to be double width
18:43:04 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: yes, you can build two-width canals, but how do you tell the ships which side to use?
18:43:22 <Bilge> You can't build a dock in a canal anyway
18:43:38 <Eddi|zuHause> you can, just needs a raised land
18:44:13 <Bilge> Then I suppose you should have a one-way system similar to roads
18:44:28 <Yexo> but by defaults roads are two-way
18:44:33 <Bilge> But implicitly speaking, a given channel is one-way as soon as the first ship enters it from a given direction and remains so until the last one leaves
18:44:44 <Yexo> if you keep the default canal as two-way, there is no incentive to make them one-way
18:45:19 <Alberth> Bilge: even 2 or more wide canals?
18:45:42 <Bilge> Yes but a double-width canal would be one-way twice
18:45:43 <Alberth> what if you split a canal in 2 directions?
18:45:56 <Yexo> Bilge: now I create a 2 tile wide canal, let a ship enter from both sides, than remove half of the canal. Now I have a 1 tile wide canal with a ship coming from 2 sides
18:46:11 <Yexo> and not only splitting, what if you merge two one-way canals?
18:46:11 <Bilge> Each "lane" of a canal can be unidirectional
18:46:24 <Alberth> Bilge: until now, nobody has found a good way to decide what you propose automatically
18:46:47 <Bilge> I have a picture of how it would work in my head but it's hard to describe
18:47:10 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: i just think it's not practical
18:47:10 <Bilge> I think a canal should be a valid destination for a ship's orders
18:47:32 <Bilge> As soon as you mouse over the canal it should be possible to highlight the route it would take through that canal regardless of width
18:47:33 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: you can put buoys on canals
18:47:44 <Yexo> currently the concept of "canal" doesn't exist in openttd, only "canal tiles"
18:47:53 <Bilge> Right, but you should add that concept
18:48:14 <Bilge> So that all connected tiles for a given "route" through the canal are treated as one entity
18:48:21 <Bilge> A double-width canal has two routes
18:48:28 <Bilge> If you modify it while a ship is in transit
18:48:31 <Bilge> It will have to turn around
18:48:36 <Belugas> Bilge: can we add an order "go to this bridge" with trains?
18:48:44 <Bilge> It can't cross over into the other "lane"
18:49:00 <Alberth> Bilge: what if another ship is already behind it?
18:49:08 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: what if you have a three-wide canal?
18:49:27 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: and where does the lane end'?
18:49:36 <Bilge> When it reaches the end of the canal
18:49:38 <Yexo> Bilge: I can see where you are going. It does add some complications to ships. Personally I wouldn't like such a change at all
18:49:53 <Yexo> ships are already marginally useful, this would make them only less viable as transport option
18:50:04 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: what if the three-wide canal ends in a 4-wide river?
18:50:06 <Bilge> I think it would be the opposite
18:50:16 <Bilge> If you adjust the costs of canals accordingly it should promote their use
18:50:27 <Yexo> but you can already adjust the cost of canals now
18:50:30 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: what if the canal makes a curve?
18:50:35 <Yexo> that is independent from the routing of ships
18:51:03 <Yexo> a more important question: will ships be able to cross eachother at crossings?
18:51:33 <Yexo> one canal from south to north, one from east to west
18:51:34 <Alberth> Yexo: have a state machine for that?
18:51:57 <Yexo> Alberth: that would have to be generated automatically
18:52:01 <Bilge> Oh I never thought about that
18:52:08 <Yexo> if not, it'd be very annoying as you would be severely limited in your options
18:52:08 <Bilge> Do canal crossings exists IRL?
18:52:32 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: of course they do. how do you think ships enter canals?
18:52:38 <Bilge> I suppose you would have to treat it like the end of the canal
18:52:43 <Bilge> i.e. where it becomes regular river again
18:52:43 <Yexo> think about a 2-tile wide canal from north to south and a 1-tile long channel from west to east that ends in the north-south channel
18:52:52 <Bilge> So that they can negotiate the crossing and then select a new course through the canal system
18:52:58 <Yexo> the ships coming from the west want to turn both south and north
18:53:31 <Yexo> so if the left of the north->south canal would be going south and the right north, ships going north would hvae to cross the southward ships
18:54:14 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: other question: how do you want slower ships being overtaken by faster ships?
18:54:50 <Alberth> Bilge: you cannot stop ships at a crossing, you'd get deadlock
18:54:52 <Belugas> like trucks are, I would assum,e
18:55:12 <Bilge> Yexo: right, so they would have to wait until the stream was free
18:55:26 <Eddi|zuHause> Belugas: but truck-overtaking is bad as well, currently
18:55:30 <Yexo> as Alberth said, letting ships stop will lead to a deadlock easily
18:55:41 <Belugas> indeed, Eddi|zuHause, indeed
18:56:04 <Bilge> Alberth: not stop them at a crossing, just stop treating the block as my proposed special "canal" type so that it can negotiate its way to the next canal path
18:56:45 <Bilge> With or without buoys as you please
18:56:47 <Yexo> Bilge: but that would mean if I add a few stubs of single-canal tiles next to my canal the complete canal would turn into freestyle
18:56:49 <Alberth> what if there is not path?
18:56:50 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: and what if the path is blocked?
18:56:57 <Yexo> which would defeat the point of your system
18:58:33 <Bilge> Eddi|zuHause: I imagine it would be similar to path signals for trains
18:59:01 <Bilge> If you have a single-width canal that crosses another single-width canal then the ship should never enter the canal system if it couldn't draw a path from start to finish
18:59:24 <Bilge> That is, if it wanted to swith directions and there was another ship oncoming from that direction
18:59:27 <Alberth> then you cannot have ships closely after each other
19:00:09 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: imho it causes too many problems, and offer too little solutions.
19:00:25 <Bilge> I guess it's not worth discussing unless I'm actually going to program it anyway since nobody is going to run with it even if I could come up with an airtight design
19:00:26 <Eddi|zuHause> rails have way more control over the available paths
19:00:28 <Yexo> Alberth: you can if you store a direction with every reservation and allow multiple reservations per tile as long as the direction is the same
19:00:41 <Bilge> I suspect that if I was proposing the signalling system for trains right now it would be met with equal doubt
19:00:45 <Bilge> Yet we have that already
19:01:03 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
19:01:04 <Bilge> But i think you have to think of canals as rails for ships
19:01:08 <Yexo> Bilge: the problem is not your suggestion, but rather the fact that it's currently not airtight
19:01:24 *** Chillosophy has joined #openttd
19:01:24 <Yexo> as soon as you have an airtight solution somebody could start implementing it, not before
19:01:31 <Bilge> The open sea is a different animal altogether and pathfinding and buoys suffices for that
19:01:44 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
19:01:58 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: what about one-tile-wide "open sea"?
19:02:00 <Bilge> I don't think I have enough experience with TTD internals to make it airtight
19:02:15 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: what about a 20 tile wide canal?
19:02:16 <Alberth> you don't need knowledge of internals
19:02:24 <Eddi|zuHause> what defines "open sea"?
19:02:38 * andythenorth needs to read log clearly :P
19:02:54 <Bilge> Eddi|zuHause: I can't imagine that would ever be a real issue. The game knows the difference between a canal and the open sea even if just by virtue of the fact that the graphics tiles are different
19:02:59 <Alberth> just an algorithm that makes the decision on a grid of tiles where some tiles are canal or sea would be sufficient
19:03:19 <Bilge> I can query a canal tile and it says "canal", whereas open sea is just "water"
19:03:28 <Bilge> The difference is well defined
19:03:38 <Bilge> Canals are created using the canal tool and open sea is created by modifying land height
19:03:50 <Alberth> once you have that, it can be built into openttd
19:04:18 <Eddi|zuHause> Bilge: but why would a one-tile-wide "open sea" be treated differently than a one-tile-wide canal?
19:04:36 <Alberth> but the algorithm can be created in any language
19:04:52 * andythenorth would welcome water types :P
19:04:54 <Bilge> Because that's the beauty of having both in the game
19:04:58 <andythenorth> dunno why, but it's obviously good
19:05:05 <Bilge> You, as the transport designer get to choose the one you want to use
19:05:35 <Alberth> andythenorth: obviosuly, since salt water allows bigger transports :)
19:05:35 <Eddi|zuHause> how is that sane design?
19:06:05 <Bilge> Because you can target canals as a destination for ships in my design whereas you cannot target open water
19:06:46 <Eddi|zuHause> why would you need to target a canal?
19:07:01 <Eddi|zuHause> you have buoys for targeting already
19:07:13 <Eddi|zuHause> there is absolutely no reason to target a canal
19:07:16 <Bilge> Buoys would be invalid in canals
19:07:27 <Eddi|zuHause> buoys are valid in canals
19:07:57 <Eddi|zuHause> by 99.9% chance you won't get a proper savegame conversion then
19:08:25 <Bilge> You seem to be putting up artificial barriers in contrast to others who point out actual flaws in the design
19:09:14 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm pointing at holes and practical problems in your supposed design
19:09:28 <Yexo> Eddi|zuHause: that is no problem, since a feature like this should be optional anyway imo
19:09:39 <Yexo> so old savegame would have this off by default
19:09:55 <Yexo> and you simply wouldn't be able to turn it on as long as there are buoys in canals or similar conversion problems
19:12:33 <Eddi|zuHause> ok, but that still does not answer the previous question: why on earth would you forbid buoys and move their functionality to canals, when buoys work perfectly fine currently?
19:15:55 <Alberth> Bilge: you could see them as destinations in a canal, perhaps?
19:15:56 <Eddi|zuHause> PS: the original lock question could be solved with "traffic objects"
19:17:15 <Eddi|zuHause> if only $someone would finish those airport state machines :p
19:19:08 * Yexo is nowhere to be found :p
19:20:43 <Eddi|zuHause> a lock could then be made similar to TTDP-locks, and at the same time limited to one ship
19:21:22 <Eddi|zuHause> (which is not entirely "realistic", but enough of a hassle to make people optimise things
19:21:54 <Eddi|zuHause> there could also be "double locks" where one side goes up and the other goes down simultaneously
19:23:13 <Eddi|zuHause> all neatly confined to newgrfs, with absolutely no change to the default game
19:23:44 <andythenorth> <tal:replace="string:someone" /> was also working on multi-stop docks
19:23:57 <andythenorth> which would have the same game outcome as fooling with canals
19:24:49 <Eddi|zuHause> i said that as well in the above discussion
19:25:09 <Eddi|zuHause> limiting docks to one (or three) ships simultaneously
19:25:26 <Eddi|zuHause> don't worry about canals at all
19:26:51 <andythenorth> it would limit ship capacity in sufficient ways to make it interesting
19:26:57 <andythenorth> and no state machine needed
19:27:11 <andythenorth> anyone prepared to write state machines should work on seaplane airports :P
19:29:45 <Bilge> andythenorth can I send you a modified language file for FIRS?
19:30:09 <Bilge> I don't want to mess about creating accounts and learning bug tracking systems
19:30:18 <andythenorth> post it in the FIRS dev thread
19:34:06 <Bilge> If I signed up on the ottd site do I have access to this forum
19:34:39 <andythenorth> no forum account :O :)
19:34:43 <Alberth> well, you always have read-only access :p
19:34:57 <andythenorth> you can try sending it to me direct from your irc client
19:35:04 <andythenorth> it sometimes works, sometimes doesn't
19:35:25 <Alberth> Bilge: dump it on a pastebin?
19:36:15 <Bilge> It is the responsibility of the sender to set up DCC correctly. Fortunately I know how to do that
19:36:27 <Bilge> I just signed up for the forum now anyway
19:36:59 <Yexo> Bilge: if you create an account on the openttd site you can use it for the wiki, bug tracker and bananas
19:37:15 <Yexo> for the forum you need a separate account, as well as yet another account for the openttdcoop devzone
19:38:36 <Bilge> I saw a list of things I could use it for and I was sure one of them was a forum - oh well :)
19:41:24 <Alberth> the forum is run by another person
19:41:47 <Bilge> I have a feeling it might predate ottd also
19:42:33 <Alberth> I wouldn't know, openttd predates me by several years :)
19:42:54 <Yexo> the forum did indeed predate openttd
19:43:14 <Alberth> at least when you start counting when I joined here for the first time :)
19:44:19 <Terkhen> I think that it also predates TTDPatch :P
19:44:32 <Bilge> One of the dialogs that annoys me the most is the "Message from vehicle manufaturer" window because it violates good UI design yet is included on a page about GUI style
19:45:02 <Terkhen> "Since OpenTTD is a game of the 1990s, it should also have that look and feel." <--- that does not mean it is a good UI design :P
19:45:05 <Bilge> By common windows layout conventions the affirmative should be the first button in left-to-right reading environments
19:45:25 <Bilge> So the "yes" and "no" buttons are the wrong way round
19:46:13 <Bilge> Every single time it pops up I nearly click the wrong one by that habit introduced by every other program (good) program out there
19:46:34 <andythenorth> ttd original probably predates some of the people now submitting ottd patches :P
19:46:56 <Terkhen> my habit introduced by years of playing TT / OpenTTD would make me click on the wrong one if that was changed
19:47:04 <andythenorth> "Since OpenTTD is a game of the 1990s, it should also have that look and feel."
19:47:18 <andythenorth> should be suffixed "except if you use giant icons + fonts"
19:47:18 <Bilge> Also the first thing i looked for was an option to move the close button to the right side of the window
19:47:47 <Terkhen> hmm... although I usually just use DEL to delete whatever uninteresting window pops up to annoy me
19:47:59 <Bilge> It's never going to look like a game of the 1990s unless you crank out an old CRT monitor running 640x480
19:48:35 <andythenorth> Bilge: all your conventions are not my conventions :)
19:48:49 <andythenorth> I don't disagree that they are windows conventions
19:49:03 <Bilge> You might have spent a little too much time with OTTD then ;p
19:49:17 <andythenorth> by accident OTTD is closer to OS X / classic Mac OS
19:49:21 <andythenorth> in some respects
19:49:21 <Bilge> Don't get me wrong, I played the original game back in 1994 for hours
19:49:29 <Bilge> But I'm looking at it now with a pair of eyes from 2011
19:49:36 <andythenorth> the GUI does suck in numerous places, but that's kind of known
19:49:39 <Terkhen> probably because when TT was released windows was not even an OS
19:49:40 <Bilge> Just because it was like that in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't be improved today
19:49:44 <andythenorth> fixing one bit starts to unpick others
19:50:00 <andythenorth> Terkhen: when it was released, you had to boot windows 3.1
19:50:10 <andythenorth> from your 256MB hard drive
19:50:15 <Terkhen> that thing was annoying
19:50:29 <Bilge> andythenorth: when it was released you had to dual boot your PC into DOS mode because Windows used up too much memory to run games
19:50:40 <andythenorth> right, what are we coding?
19:51:03 <Terkhen> andythenorth: newgrf debug gui for town persistent storage, soon I'll start testing :)
19:51:44 <Katje_> Terkhen: ooh, whats that?
19:52:55 <Terkhen> Katje_: registers for towns that all NewGRFs can access (under some restrictions to avoid a descent to madness)
19:53:11 <Terkhen> andythenorth has a lot of ideas in that direction about this feature :)
19:53:26 <Katje_> what does that mean to me as a player ?
19:53:52 <Terkhen> industry and house newgrfs will be able to implement new cool features
19:54:37 <Terkhen> towns having distinct building styles for example
19:57:46 <andythenorth> a town won't be able to access another town's storage by putting the town id in register 101h?
19:58:04 <andythenorth> it's not a good way to do pipelines anyway
19:58:10 <andythenorth> I *know* pipelines are wrong
19:58:22 <andythenorth> but every time I have oil wells ~16 tiles from the shore, I want one
19:58:59 <Terkhen> hmm... how are town persistent storage and pipelines related?
19:59:12 <andythenorth> I test things by thinking aloud :P
19:59:43 <Alberth> andythenorth: just draw a 1 tile pumping station for putting at the shore :p
20:02:27 <andythenorth> I think that's done in DWE set ;)
20:02:45 <andythenorth> above ground pipelines, like alaska
20:02:47 <Katje_> hold on there is pipelines as a feature?
20:02:59 <andythenorth> nor is there likely to be, except by abusive newgrfs
20:03:00 <Katje_> they would be a great feature...
20:03:13 <andythenorth> they are not transport (allegedly)
20:03:31 * andythenorth somewhat disagrees
20:03:51 <andythenorth> so does the source of all human knowledge
20:05:43 *** firefoxfan has joined #openttd
20:06:36 <andythenorth> hmm "The engineering of this roundabout in Bristol, United Kingdom, attempts to make traffic flow free-moving"
20:06:42 <andythenorth> it kind of works
20:06:49 <Alberth> we should have a trainset with people on the roof etc
20:06:50 <andythenorth> but it sucks to cycle through
20:06:55 <andythenorth> Alberth: that's being done
20:07:44 <andythenorth> look in the thread
20:08:02 * andythenorth bought a suit in that roundabout picture
20:08:11 <andythenorth> in the building bottom left
20:08:36 <andythenorth> but enough about me :P
20:08:41 <peter1138> andythenorth, technically the yellow boxes are implied on all rounadabouts
20:08:47 <Terkhen> I assumed it was a joke :O
20:08:48 <peter1138> just everybody ignores that
20:09:52 <andythenorth> wiki-surfing is always fun :P
20:12:01 <Terkhen> infrastructure that transport constant amounts of cargo over time without needing a vehicle?
20:12:44 <andythenorth> same underlying spec could also do ropeways, skilifts etc
20:13:05 <Terkhen> it would need a completely new way of moving cargopackets around
20:13:17 <andythenorth> and some work on the map array no doubt
20:13:42 <andythenorth> might be tmwftlb, but I don't think it's a wrong concept
20:14:00 <Terkhen> I agree on both of your statements :P
20:14:19 <andythenorth> for gameplay I would limit it to 'occupies the tile, unless you tunnel explicitly'
20:14:24 <Terkhen> it might be wrong regarding the "openttd is about transport companies" design principle
20:14:32 <andythenorth> i.e. you can't just place start + end point
20:14:45 <andythenorth> every tile between point A and B must contain this transport type
20:15:25 <andythenorth> you could maybe tunnel, but same limitations as current - no corners, no crossing
20:16:56 <andythenorth> move the packets using invisible vehicles
20:17:06 <andythenorth> number of vehicles is a function of 'capacity'
20:17:16 <andythenorth> player chooses capacity when building
20:17:26 <andythenorth> capacity can be upgraded or downgraded by overbuilding
20:17:55 <andythenorth> smallest capacity tile on entire point-point route determines actual capacity used
20:18:46 <andythenorth> use the tram pathfinder
20:19:02 <planetmaker> [21:54] Terkhen towns having distinct building styles for example <--hmm... :-) I didn't think of *that*
20:19:12 <Terkhen> andythenorth's idea :)
20:19:19 <andythenorth> can already be done near enough
20:19:40 <Terkhen> first house to be placed "decides" on the building style and stores it in a register, the rest of houses follow that decision
20:19:53 <andythenorth> you could already do that: check town ID for example, have rules for odd / even, divide by 3, whatever scheme you want
20:19:53 <planetmaker> andythenorth: you can kinda retrieve the next town's 'style' by querying distinct houses
20:19:58 <planetmaker> it's an abuse, but could work
20:20:42 <Terkhen> but now you can base your decision on stuff like "tiles from water" or "tile height" and store it (I never checked house callbacks but I'm assuming the usual stuff)
20:20:58 <Terkhen> s/now/when it is done/ ;)
20:21:30 <andythenorth> no-one has shot down my pipeline idea :P
20:21:45 * andythenorth expects arguments to be tested :D
20:21:50 <planetmaker> Terkhen: I think we *urgently* need a new town set :-P
20:21:56 <andythenorth> planetmaker: why?
20:22:10 <planetmaker> [22:20] Terkhen but now you can base your decision on stuff like "tiles from water" or "tile height" and store it (I never checked house callbacks but I'm assuming the usual stuff) <-- that's why :-P
20:22:10 <Terkhen> andythenorth: I find it conceptually correct, but too much work
20:22:27 <andythenorth> terrain-dependent towns?
20:22:51 <andythenorth> if we went digging in 60+ vars that might be possible now
20:22:57 <andythenorth> or maybe even just in <60+ vars
20:24:37 <Terkhen> Zephyris procedural tool? :P
20:25:32 <andythenorth> he should adjust the lighting in that case :P
20:25:35 * andythenorth is broken record
20:32:34 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
20:35:08 * andythenorth should code some new FIRS
20:35:33 <Bilge> andythenorth, what does this line mean: #define TEXT_INFO_MS_PRIMARY_BOOST "\98Manufacturing supplies double production from other cargos.\0D\0D\80"
20:35:38 <Bilge> Keeping in mind I haven't played FIRS yet
20:35:49 <Bilge> Doesn't it mean FOR other cargo?
20:36:10 <Bilge> Or even, for other INDUSTRY?
20:36:23 <andythenorth> that line is possibly not used in current FIRS
20:36:33 <andythenorth> let me check for you ;)
20:37:36 <andythenorth> yup not used - don't bother translating
20:37:47 <andythenorth> we haven't been removing old language defines
20:38:00 <Bilge> I'm translating it into English
20:39:42 <andythenorth> interesting direction :)
20:42:41 <Bilge> The phrase "within a month" is used a lot but how does that work exactly?
20:43:07 <Bilge> From the way it's worded I gather it doesn't have to be the same month
20:43:13 <Bilge> Like febrary to march would be OK
20:43:19 <Terkhen> you should play before trying to translate it
20:43:21 <Bilge> What about months with 28 days?
20:43:35 <Bilge> Even if I played I still wouldn't have the answer to that
20:44:03 <andythenorth> currently it's inconsistent
20:44:15 <andythenorth> for some cargos it's within the same calendar month
20:44:22 <planetmaker> a month is a calander month
20:44:24 <andythenorth> for others it's within ~30 days
20:44:47 <andythenorth> it should be made consistent :P
20:45:05 <andythenorth> here['someone'] can do that when it's converted to nml
20:46:48 <Bilge> I won't bother trying to make the text read any clearer then
20:49:49 <andythenorth> the cargos and industry names are quite stable
20:50:11 <andythenorth> the industry window texts might change in future versions
20:55:24 <planetmaker> I like your "good news, bad news" - posting, Eddi|zuHause ;-)
20:55:35 <andythenorth> Bilge: the file didn't transfer :(
20:56:03 <Bilge> Might be this crappy windows firewall
20:56:26 <planetmaker> dccs never reach me ;-)
20:56:56 <Belugas> END OF THE FREAKING DAY!!!!!
20:57:18 <Belugas> so... go home and keep onbuilding my walls!!
21:00:32 <planetmaker> enjoy, Belugas :-)
21:01:29 <Bilge> Can you just accept this one first? :)
21:01:39 <andythenorth> I did already ;)
21:01:45 <andythenorth> dcc rarely works
21:02:16 <andythenorth> we have a work irc where we run our own server with everything supported - it doesn't work even there
21:05:02 <Bilge> I can't attach a file on the forum that doesn't work either
21:05:09 <Bilge> >The extension pnfo is not allowed.
21:05:29 <Bilge> As if the file name in any way denoted the type of content I'm uploading
21:05:33 <andythenorth> have to zip it :(
21:05:44 <andythenorth> or change the extension to .txt
21:06:16 <Bilge> I just renamed it to .zip
21:06:51 <Chris_Booth> Needing someone is like needing a parachute. If he isn't there the first time you need him, chances are you won't be needing him again.
21:10:31 <andythenorth> now my mac thinks it is a zip
21:10:37 <andythenorth> and is trying to decompress it
21:11:09 <Chris_Booth> change file type?
21:11:15 <Chris_Booth> or will that break your mac?
21:11:46 <Alberth> Chris_Booth: clearly, it did :p
21:12:15 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
21:12:37 <andythenorth> duke nukem is being released :o
21:12:41 <Alberth> you managed to unbreak your mac?
21:12:59 <Chris_Booth> that is so true ^
21:15:26 <Chris_Booth> I am never quite sure why I have this channel on my start up list, not as if I talk in here much unless I am trying to annoy someone
21:15:56 <SmatZ> because you like openttd?
21:16:22 <Chris_Booth> yes but I have other openttd channels that I uses
21:16:50 <Chris_Booth> think its the same reason I join #tycoon
21:16:53 <Eddi|zuHause> thou shall not have an openttd channel besides us!
21:17:07 <Chris_Booth> realy, not even a realy nice server channel
21:17:12 <Chris_Booth> or nice dev channel?
21:17:58 <Chris_Booth> I shalst have to @kbanme from all other openttd channels then
21:18:07 <Chris_Booth> otherwise I am breaking the rules of this channel
21:20:05 <Eddi|zuHause> first person never has -st ending
21:20:34 <andythenorth> Chris_Booth: you could remove the auto-join
21:20:39 <andythenorth> life might get better
21:21:17 <Chris_Booth> andythenorth: no that would make my IRC client explode
21:23:10 <SmatZ> nice, about 16% of pupils failed that high-school final exams (das Abitur) ... it was the first year when there was a common part of exams that was the same for all schools
21:25:17 <V453000> guess young people dont drink enough beer SmatZ
21:25:27 <V453000> all those vodka and shit ...
21:25:31 <Yexo> SmatZ: only part of it is the same? is the rest made by each school separately?
21:25:34 <andythenorth> are advanced sprite layouts documented on ttdp wiki?
21:25:47 <V453000> Yexo: yes, it has 2 parts afaik
21:26:26 <andythenorth> that's a lot of stuff to add to current ttdp wiki page :o
21:26:36 <andythenorth> maybe it needs its own page
21:26:49 <Chris_Booth> wow 16% is high, is it a hard exam?
21:26:59 <frosch123> i guess the current station action 0 page first needs splitting
21:27:14 <frosch123> moving all the general blabla (what is a bounding box) to a separate page
21:28:05 <andythenorth> that would make sense
21:28:32 <frosch123> but currently the action 0 page is already too hard to understand :p
21:28:40 <frosch123> so i did not dare adding more stuff :p
21:28:59 <Eddi|zuHause> SmatZ: when they introduced "western" standards for "Abitur" here, they switched between a very hard one and a very easy one each year, until they met the proper difficulty in the middle like after 10 years ;)
21:29:05 <andythenorth> it took me too long to understand that stations worked differently to house / industry tiles :P
21:29:35 <andythenorth> it's too late today to rework that wiki for me :|
21:29:39 <SmatZ> there were test exams in October
21:30:06 <SmatZ> so they rougly knew how hard the exams are... expectations were 15%-20% of students will fail :)
21:30:44 <frosch123> andythenorth: does that help anything?
21:30:54 <Yexo> andythenorth: that's a bad idea imo
21:30:55 <frosch123> the current spec is only an add-on spec
21:30:58 <andythenorth> only reminding someone not to forget
21:31:19 <frosch123> and i already added a note to the wiki
21:31:22 <Yexo> mostly because it's splitting the spec across two wikis
21:31:29 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
21:31:38 <frosch123> also there are quite some corner cases which need pointing out better
21:31:48 <frosch123> so, the whole spritelayout stuff needs renewing
21:32:00 <Eddi|zuHause> SmatZ: so it was exactly in the expected range, where is the problem? :p
21:32:50 <andythenorth> I was considering trying some extended layouts with FIRS
21:32:56 * frosch123 remembers a test with an exponential distribution for the results: 1/2 failed, 1/4 got 4.0, 1/8 got 3.7, 1/16 gor 3.3, ...
21:33:19 <SmatZ> Eddi|zuHause: there's no problem :) it just makes me happy the quality of high schools might rise
21:33:42 <SmatZ> and so there's a common scale of knowledge for all schools
21:33:43 <Yexo> here they just average the results so they expected number of students fails
21:34:09 <SmatZ> so universities can take the "score" for the final exams into account when accepting students
21:34:24 <Yexo> doesn't matter how good or bad the students from that year are, they'll adjust the results so that approximately the same amount of students fail
21:35:22 <frosch123> well, from my experience with exams (revising, not doing myself), there is usually quite a gap in the results. so you can easily separate failing from passed
21:35:45 <Chris_Booth> that is how most university's in the UK work, they set out limits of the grades as a % of students
21:36:11 *** andythenorth has left #openttd
21:36:13 <Chris_Booth> and then give out 1st 2nd etc according to where you sat along the curve of results
21:36:41 <Chris_Booth> means they can make grades look as good or as bad as they want
21:36:46 <Chris_Booth> which is rather stupid
21:36:52 <SmatZ> I wonder what effect on above-average students can have the fact that they know that 5% of students will fail
21:37:14 <SmatZ> and that they are unlikely to fail, even if they won't study well for the exams
21:37:52 <Chris_Booth> its about 30% fail rates for 3rd year degrees
21:38:03 <Eddi|zuHause> SmatZ: i don't think that has any effect at all
21:38:15 <Chris_Booth> it also isn't all subjects
21:38:21 <Eddi|zuHause> Chris_Booth: university is a whole different picture
21:38:40 <frosch123> SmatZ: i know a lot who skipped any preparation, if they were sure they would somehow pass
21:38:46 <Eddi|zuHause> Chris_Booth: like 80% drop out during the first two semesters
21:39:05 <Chris_Booth> Eddi|zuHause: what university did you go to?
21:39:38 <Eddi|zuHause> numbers may vary drastically depending on what topic you study
21:39:50 <Eddi|zuHause> and whether that topic was restricted in the first place
21:39:59 <Eddi|zuHause> (numerus clausus)
21:40:31 <Chris_Booth> we had about 50% drop out on my course
21:40:40 <Chris_Booth> and that was high the university said
21:40:56 <Chris_Booth> but we ended up with only 15 people on the course :D
21:42:40 <planetmaker> Chris_Booth: my smallest university courses were myself and two other fellows. One of them dropped half-way ;-)
21:43:24 <Chris_Booth> that is small I thought 15 was small
21:43:41 <Chris_Booth> most of my friends have 100s of people on there course
21:44:49 <Eddi|zuHause> i had a lecture with one other guy and the professor
21:45:17 <Eddi|zuHause> advanced analysis ;)
21:46:58 <Eddi|zuHause> with really cool tidbits on the sidelines... like "Gauss took a few seminars at this university. but they usually refrain from calling him a 'student'" :p
21:53:27 * planetmaker usually shows visiting friends the school where Gauss summed up the numbers of 0 ... 100 much too fast for his teacher's liking ;-)
21:55:36 * Eddi|zuHause wonders whether that actually happened, or they just made that stuff up to torture innocent pupils
21:56:20 <planetmaker> it's not unlikely. With a bit of thinking that formula is very clear
21:57:51 <planetmaker> \sum_i=1^n = (n+1)*n/2 = (n*n + n) / 2
21:58:23 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but it's very unlikely they had that notation back then :p
21:58:24 <planetmaker> sum 1 ... 100 = (100+1) + (99+2) + (98+3) + ...
21:58:40 <Eddi|zuHause> i know the formula
21:59:29 * planetmaker has a mis-aligned grid sprite :S
22:10:23 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
22:13:25 *** Prof_Frink has joined #openttd
22:19:44 <planetmaker> btw, Eddi|zuHause do you still need an action5 block for <whatever> or have you added it already?
22:20:12 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: i think what i did worked, just nforenum bails
22:20:27 <Eddi|zuHause> with an overly dramatic error
22:20:47 <planetmaker> adopt the number of sprites accordingly
22:20:57 <Eddi|zuHause> i just think it could be less fatal of an error
22:22:23 <planetmaker> it's just a two-line change to grfcodec / nforenum, though
22:22:44 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm not compiling it myself
22:23:11 <planetmaker> definitely not more complicated than openttd
22:29:06 <Eddi|zuHause> my philosophy is "don't compile anything that you don't have to"
22:53:36 <Bilge> planetmaker: you here 24/7?
23:04:23 *** JVassie has joined #openttd
23:04:47 <Yexo> Bilge: he uses a bouncer, which means he'll appear to be online for 24/7
23:04:54 <Yexo> that doesn't mean he's at his computer the whole time
23:05:08 <Yexo> but you can highlight him at any time of the day and he'll read your message when he is
23:05:32 <Bilge> By contrast you ARE here 24/7 :P
23:06:12 <Yexo> not for any longer, as I'm going to sleep now ;)
23:09:46 <Eddi|zuHause> are you asking anybody now who writes something, whether he is online 24/7?
23:22:59 *** amkoroew1 has joined #openttd
23:52:21 *** zachanima has joined #openttd
continue to next day ⏵
